Sunday, August 5, 2012

Some Olympic Musings

Asian Men Walking Tall.

Although often billed as a gathering of the world's athletes coming together to compete in the name of goodwill and international understanding, the Olympics are just as often a proxy for nations to vent their political frustrations on one another through winning on the field of sport. In some ways and to some minds, winning at competition reflects the superiority of a political, social, or even moral, system of a given country. With this in mind I fully expected these London Olympics to provide us with some tense competition and commentary that reflected the present-day economic and political reality of our times. I wasn't disappointed.

Unsurprisingly, the nail-biting anxiety (and the accompanying xenophobic hostility) felt in the West about China's economic rise and its increasing influence in the developing world has been reflected in reactions to China's Olympic successes. Various outraged (and unfounded) insinuations of doping made against victorious Chinese competitors were a simple reflection of Western society's resentful attitudes towards Asians - it is a given that any success or excellence has to be the result of some kind of cheating or underhandedness. Even worse is the fact that stereotypically weak Asians are proving to be just as physically capable as their non-Asian competitors. It is said that when the human mind is presented with evidence that contradicts what it has believed for its entire existence, it will respond rage against the new information and attempt to find any ad-hoc rationalization (regardless of how irrational or unreasonable it may be) to will enable it to maintain its false belief against all the evidence - then the mind will resent you for making it see a truth it didn't want to see.

This is what has been so clearly displayed at London 2012 - stereotypes about Asians have crumbled in plain sight of everyone and the resulting outrage and resentment in some quarters indicates the degree to which the Western mind that has created a xenophobic fantasy about Asian inferiority that it is unwilling to let go of.

The most charming thing about the Chinese athletes is that they seem oblivious to this negative racialization of their success as they speed past their competitors. They simply don't know that their ethnicity is supposed to be an obstacle to athletic excellence. One way that I have noticed this is in the swagger of the Chinese men's gymnastics team.....

 

These guys range in height from between 5'3 to 5'6, but they don't seem to have heard that being short and Asian means that they aren't masculine. Their confidence and self-assurance was so jarring because American culture insists that Asian men have no reason to possess these qualities of confidence and self-assurance. Of course, the reason that they may seem so confident is that they haven't been raised in a culture that mocks their masculinity and racializes their achievements and potential - the world has been presented to them in a way that it might not have been presented to Asian men raised in the US, a world in which their race need not influence their opportunities, ambitions, or what is expected of them. The Japanese men's gymnastics team has also performed extremely well, taking the silver in the team event - even though they could have done without the Boy Band feminine hairstyles....

The Japanese men and their silver medal on top of the medal podium.

Having said that, the guy on the right is 18-year-old Ryohei Kato whose looks have apparently caught the attention of thousands of Chinese female fans who have overcome decades of mutual Sino-Japanese distrust to register their lust for him. Women like pretty boys sometimes!

In other good news for Asian men - and for Asian soccer fans - Japan and South Korea have both reached the semi-finals of Olympic soccer tournament. Japan will play Mexico, and Korea will play Brazil in the next round. Although not considered anywhere as important as the World Cup - mainly because most of the players making the teams must be under 23 - the Olympic soccer tournament is still a good indication of a country's pool of talent. Japan have played some really nice football, whilst S. Korea apparently outperformed and outplayed their more highly-regarded British opponents. It is also interesting to note the reaction of a Swiss player to discovering that Asians aren't racially weaker after his side was beaten by the Koreans. People don't like having their strongly held beliefs challenged.

On a final note, it has been interesting to note the success of China's female athletes. For a culture that gave us footbinding - a practice that was ended decades ago, but for which China is still being irrationally castigated - and is held by many as a hell on earth for women, the Chinese seem to hold women's athletics in high esteem, and also seem to be heavily invested in promoting sporting excellence for their women athletes. In this regard, it might even be suggested that Chinese women have greater opportunities in sport participation and success than their Western counterparts. Who knows, maybe China isn't still culturally stuck in the 9th Century like many commentators would have us believe.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Help Joseph Pham.

I received this comment on my blog post on Joseph Pham that linked to website set up to support Pham and contribute to his defence.

Here is a post from the site in English giving some background to the story.....

Seven years. Seven years. 
For seven years, day after day, your family has been harassed. Diapers and dog feces have been thrown at your children, your home windows have been shattered, your car damaged, and your life threatened. All this happens simply because the music filtered from your speakers is in Vietnamese, the food you cook smells of fish sauce, and your skin is hued in golden tones. 
This is the ugly face of discrimination, prejudice, racism, and outright hatred. In such a volatile atmosphere where your pleas of help throughout the system have been ignored and danger stands to take away everything you love in the wink of an eye, would you suffer the loss of those you have sworn to protect or would you fight for the safety of your family? 
On the evening of Saturday, June 9th 2012, when Brian Wilson pounded on his neighbor’s door with words of fury shaking the summer night, this was the terrible decision which Joseph Pham faced. 
Who is Joseph Pham? 
Joseph Pham is an American. In 1982 Joseph fled his native country of Vietnam to seek a better life. The United States of America, land of the free and the home of the brave, offered a welcoming beacon. Since the day he set foot on her soil, Joseph has worked hard to fulfill his American Dream, earning his US citizenship, raising a beautiful family of five, and enjoying the freedoms only America can offer. 
In his youth, Joseph lived in Cedar Rapids, Iowa with the Moyle’s, his American foster family. For nine years he was loved and treated like a biological son. He attended McKinley Junior High and Washington High School where his driven spirit and desire for self-improvement earned him exceptional grades and honors. 
After high school, he moved to California to be reunited with his biological parents. Until their deaths in 2002, he supported and cared for his much respected elders. During this time as well, he met and married his wife, Thu Van Nguyen. They became a family of three with the birth of their oldest daughter Kathie. Eventually, Nancy came along and finally Jack arrived to complete the family portrait. 
The Nightmare Begins 
In 2005, Joseph and his family decided to move back to Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He desired a return to his Midwestern roots where his memory recalled the safety and security of small town life. Joseph sought to overcome the sad void created by the death of his birth parents and build a new life in Iowa, where his young family could come to better know the foster parents that loved and raised him. 
Gathering his wife, two daughters, and only son, he made the journey from Westminster, California to Cedar Rapids, Iowa. They found the house of their dreams and settled in. Unfortunately, the Moses’ weren’t pleased with the new family in the neighborhood and set about creating a nightmare. 
The neighborly relationship was instantly marred by racial tension. The Pham family was verbally harassed on a regular basis. The Moses family would yell out hateful messages, such as: “We don’t want you here,” “You’re not welcome here,” and “Go back to where you came from.” Eventually, the verbal harassment escalated into violence.Windows were broken, muddy tire prints and torn grass offered evidence of vehicles driven across the Pham’s property, mail was stolen and discarded in mutilated states, feces was thrown at the children, vehicles were vandalized, and the list of harassments continue, spanning for years on end and in various manners. Seeking to quell the injustices brought against them, the Pham’s repeatedly called the police department and numerous police reports were filed. 
In 2010, the Pham’s sought legal action against Jamie Moses when a rock thrown by his hand shattered the family’s front window and left Kathie Pham with multiple cuts and bruises as well as friend who was sleeping over. The lawsuit sought reconciliation for damages including emotional distress, pain/suffering, property damage, punitive damages and court costs. Jamie Moses pleaded guilty to fifth-degree criminal mischief for breaking the Pham’s windows. He was ordered to pay for repair of the window which totaled 190 dollars. The judge filed a no-contact order between Jamie and the Pham family as well.Still, peace was hard in coming. Shortly after the case closed, Jamie and Tracy Moses divorced. Jamie moved out and Brian Wilson, moved in. The same harassments continued, the same prejudices, the same racism, simply a different face. 
On June the 9th, 2012, the family had just returned from a graduation party. Danger tainted the air, flavored in the same bitter taste of hatred for no other reason than to hate. When Brian Wilson’s fist pounded the front door and his angry shouts rang through the night, Joseph Pham’s instincts took over and the rest of the story is one that remains to be told with time. 
Please Help 
Joseph Pham is currently charged with three counts of attempted murder and intimidation with a dangerous weapon. His family waits for their visit to the Linn County jail twice a week, the maximum days they are allowed, in 30 minute increments.Each day the mother with three children cower behind closed windows and locked doors, afraid to live any longer in the home that is now a thing of their nightmares. People drive by with shouts of support and disdain. At night they sleep with friends, where no one will know, where no one will scream words of hate or shake fists of rage. 
Thu Van is a housewife with three young children to care for and feed alone. Their protector and financial head is gone. All that remains are fear, questions, helplessness…, bills…, legal fees, and tears. 
If you are able, please offer Joseph Pham and his family aid in any means possible at this time of hardship. Defense fees are high. Times are hard.  His family is in need of your support to fight for his justice and freedom.
The most surprising thing about this case is how silent the Asian-American blogosphere has been. For me, this case is a perfect illustration of how America's cultural anti-Asian racial antagonism promotes racial harassment  and permits prejudice whilst censuring those Asians who stand up to it.

The site tells you how you can contribute. Please help the guy out in whatever way you can.

Thursday, July 5, 2012

Vacation!

Just a short announcement that I will be on vacation until July 18th. I'm not sure if there will be internet access where I'm going so feel free to comment but I may not be able to respond or even publish comments until the 18th. See you soon!

European And Australian Immigrants.....

......Are They Bad For America?

The 8Asians blog published a post recently discussing an article on CNN's website in which a religion scholar, Stephen Prothero, notes the potential effects of increased Asian immigration on America's religiosity. According to Prothero, because a lower percentage of Asian immigrants report that religion is "very important in their lives", an increase in Asian immigration may thus lead to a less religious America.

The first issue with the article is its vagueness. What exactly does it mean to say that a person or group is less religious? How is religiosity defined? I think that most American Christians attend only church once a week and maybe a mid-week church function and the number of people who pray at least once-a-day varies from around five out of ten, to ninety out of ten depending on denomination. But even this may not accurately or completely reflect religiosity in daily life. For example, the spiritual concept of "mindfulness" is very much grounded in religious concepts and an individual who gives a few bucks to the homeless guy on the corner every morning may well be considered to be acting in a mindful way as derived from whatever religious doctrine they follow, yet may not consider themselves to be following a religious life.

Furthermore, "mindfulness" is a more difficult concept to quantify because throughout the day, individuals may well be carrying out "mindful" acts but may not necessarily view this as being an act of religious practice although they may understand that it is a reflection of their religious belief. Plus, because self-reporting is by definition subjective, what constitutes religiosity will mean vastly different things to different people. For some, praying five-times a day may not be religious enough and for others praying once-a-week might seem devotional. So, the premise of the article is so overly vague to lack any real meaning and would really seem to amount to little more than a musing that seems to take some random statistics and extrapolate, to an almost far-fetched degree, a potentially momentous social shift, based on a vague premise. But, Asians should, by now, be used to hearing white men making dramatic generalized suggestions about our community based on vague premises and dubious reasoning.

Yet, what is revealing about the article is the way that it reflects an unfair, and perhaps biased, attitude towards immigration from non-white countries, whilst no consideration is given to the effects of immigration from white countries. For instance, in the past twenty years, around 4.5 million immigrants have settled in the US from predominantly "white" countries of Europe and Australia. Although, relatively low compared to immigration from Asia and Latin America, it is not an insignificant number. Significantly for this discussion is the fact that Europe (both Western and Eastern) are reported to have some of the highest rates of unbelief in the world, ranging from 20%-35% of populations in some Western European countries up to almost 50% of populations in some Eastern European countries reporting no religion.

Coincidentally (or not) in the passed two decades the dialogue on religious belief has developed into a culture war as more and more atheists have become outspoken about their disbelief and push for a less religious America (a result of European immigration perhaps?). At the forefront of this "movement" have been Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins two British-born, high-profile atheists, one of whom (Hitchens) is a naturalized American citizen, the other (Dawkins) lived and worked at the University of California, and is a regular visitor to the US and, for all I know, may well be a permanent resident. Between them they have sold almost three million books in which they suggest that religious believers may be stupid, wicked hypocrites, and that religion is the most corrupting thing ever to afflict the human race. From Australia another atheist, Peter Singer, has lived and worked since 1999 at Princeton University. Singer is less well-known, but still an influential philosopher, whose materialism-derived utilitarian ethics has caused controversy amongst the religious and non-religious alike.

These three highly influential public figures whose work has greatly influenced American thought in the past decade or so, and made atheism and materialistic ethics a major part of the dialogue on belief, have encouraged Americans to abandon religion and embrace atheism. Yet, no Americans have come forward to suggest that European immigrants might be making America less religious, even though that would seem to be a reasonable and logical conclusion. There just doesn't seem to be the same concern about the societal effects on American religious practice of an influx of Europeans into America.

One could argue that the numbers aren't sufficient enough to make such a major impact on general society. But I would submit that higher "social capital" of white people more than makes up for the low numbers. What I mean by this, is that white people (especially men) as a group and individuals are given more value, authority, and credibility in American society than other ethnicities, such that it may be easier for them to attain positions of influence and authority within the culture. The case of Hitchens, Dawkins, and Singer are clear examples of this; these three men have undoubtedly had more influence over America's attitudes towards religion than all of the Asian immigrant 711 owners and Asians in academia and finance put together, yet,
 it doesn't cross anybody's mind that European immigrants might contribute significantly making America less religious.

But the concerns about the effects of immigration from white countries do not stop with the religious question. In recent years, the rising influence of extreme right-wing thinking in Western and Eastern Europe has caused some considerable concern amongst rights groups across the continent. Recent elections in France and Greece show that far-right parties have gained almost 20% and 7% of the vote respectively. Even more problematic are the declarations of mainstream leaders of France, Britain, and Germany that multiculturalism has failed which reflects a shift away from tolerant attitudes towards ethnic minorities.

Given these facts, it would be reasonable to conclude that of the millions of European immigrants that have settled in the US over the passed two decades, a sizeable number of them would carry with them attitudes that may be, at best, opposed to a multicultural society, and at worst, harbour extreme right-wing sympathies. Either way, white people are given the benefit of the doubt most times, and (as Hitchens and Dawkins illustrate) we can expect that their ethnic origin will not be considered with regards to the effect their presence or ideas will have on society, it is reasonable to presume that any European immigrants who harbour these attitudes will have their ideas easily and seamlessly absorbed and adopted by mainstream America. Because white immigrants are a true unknown - after all, who is studying white immigrants and the attitudes that they bring with them? - they truly represent a potentially grave threat to America's multicultural existence.

For many immigrants, Asian or otherwise, the US has come to represent an ideal in which regardless of the circumstances of one's birth and origin, one can come to America and find personal success and dream that one day your own child could become President, with nothing to hold you back but your own demons. America's ideals of liberty, justice, religious and political freedom, fairness, and the belief that you can control your own destiny, are what attracts the millions of Asian immigrants to America. The growing shift in Europe towards intolerance of minorities, multiculturalism, and (ever more increasingly) religious practice stand in stark contrast to very core values that have made America the beacon of freedom that it has come to represent. Yet, the idea that European immigration could have a major negative influence on these American ideals is never examined.

Instead, America notes the impact on religious belief from Asian immigrants who have no substantial voice in the political arena or, more significantly, have no influence or voice in America's cultural dialogue (the one exception to this is the Dalai Lama who hangs out religiously with Hollywood celebs as they meditate to the tune of Kumbaya). Most absurd is the lack of meaningful evidence for making this kind of projection. There's little evidence that Asian immigration up until now has had any impact on religious belief, even though in some states and cities Asians account for up to a third of the population. In an brazen display of double-speak Prothero's article points out the religiosity of Asian immigrants, as well as the tendency for immigrants to become more religious once they arrive in the US. He then makes a vague reference to the high rate of the "unaffiliated", and then suggests that this may reflect a possible trend to less religiosity. For Prothero, 2 plus 2 equals 5.

Most disturbing is the character and tone of the article which follows a common pattern that I alluded to here, and is the routine way in which mainstream America discusses its "Asian problem". White commentators can make just about any allegation or statement about Asian people and be given the platform to say it even though the evidence for it may be tenuous at best. Even worse in this case is the fact that it is white European immigrants - up to 50% of whom may have no belief in God - and in the case of many (like Hitchens) actively seek an end to religious practice, who would most logically present the biggest threat to America's religious practice and even freedoms. Yet, no white social or religious expert worries that European immigration will strengthen these attitudes, even though that would seem to be the most logical conclusion.

The issue of ethnic Caucasian immigrants from Europe and Australia bringing extreme right-wing attitudes and opposition to multiculturalism (which in reality means non-white multiculturalism) with them is an even bigger concern. An America that fails at multiculturalism, is a failed America that no longer stands for freedom and equality.

Monday, June 18, 2012

Happy Father's Day

An American Hero.

I just came across this story over at Angry Asian Man - a man of Vietnamese descent living in Iowa, has been charged with three counts of attempted murder and one count of intimidation with a dangerous weapon after he shot at his neighbours following years of being on the receiving end of racial harassment and intimidation. The incident took place after Pham had being verbally abused and threatened by his neighbour who had banged on Pham's door and demanded that he come out and fight. According to his family, the normally even tempered and  law-abiding Pham, snapped after years of similar intimidation and defended himself in the only language his racist neighbour apparently could understand. Here's more.......
Family members of a Cedar Rapids man accused of trying to kill his neighbors say he snapped after enduring years of racial slurs, broken windows and thrown feces..... 
....Police said the shooting stemmed from a disagreement between the two men. Pham’s family contends it started years earlier, citing police reports, a restraining order and even a lawsuit as evidence of years of harassment from neighbors, including Wilson and Moses..... 
..Both Springer and Kathie Pham said Joseph Pham had called the police several times, but the harassment continued.... 
..Pham filed a lawsuit in 2010 against Jamie Moses, Tracy Moses’ ex-husband. He claimed Moses had broken two windows of the Phams’ home, driven his vehicle in their yard and torn up the grass, destroyed their mail, fired a shotgun over their property, contacted DirecTV to cancel their service and thrown feces at Kathie Pham. The lawsuit seeks damages including emotional distress, pain and suffering, property damage, punitive damages and court costs... 
...Springer said Saturday’s incident began when Pham was working outside and Brian Wilson came up to the fence and started making racial slurs. He told Pham to come outside and fight him, Pham’s niece said, and then he went to the front door and started banging on it.
This is a common experience for Asian people and it is one of the ways that anti-Asian racism is perpetuated to keep Asians in their place. The way it works is that some anti-Asian racist will provoke and harass an Asian, but because this type of behaviour is normalized in American society (in fact, its cultural depictions of Asians can be said to be a form of racial harassment) any attempts at self-defence are reined in by authorities and the media.

This story from 2009, the LA riots of twenty years ago, and now Pham's story illustrate one of the ways that anti-Asian racism is perpetuated in society. In the case of the student, he acted just like any other school-age boy would have acted, but school authorities overlooked the racial harassment that he had been subjected to, and allowed the boy who had perpetrated it to go unpunished, whilst at the same time the Asian boy is suspended and criminally charged. In the case of the LA riots, the Koreans were targeted because of their race, and were widely castigated by the media for defending themselves.

On a personal note - and some of you readers may have experienced something similar - my first experience of racism occurred the day after I started school when I was five. Two boys a year ahead of me started using racial slurs and physically attacking me in full view of teachers and playground monitors who watched but did nothing. I put up with it for a day and a half, until lunchtime on my third day of school when I turned on my tormentors after they had again kicked and punched me and started flailing on one of them. The other kid became afraid and ran off like a bitch to tell a teacher. Of course, the two white boys were given no reprimand but I, on the other hand, was angrily scolded and told that I was a thug. Luckily for me, but not for the school, my parents didn't stay quiet and they marched up  to the school with some extended family members and made sure the school understood the error that they had made.

As you can see, in all of these situations, mainstream America is empowered to openly commit acts of racial violence and harassment against Asians, yet it is the Asian victims who are castigated when we retaliate (like any human being would do) in any shape or form. This is one of the ways that anti-Asian prejudice is propagated throughout American society and it is how mainstream America effectively sanctions racial baiting and violence towards Asian people.

That's why it is possible for anti-Asian prejudice to be openly expressed by Americans of all kinds, from hate-driven neighbours to the most popular cultural figures and influential politicians, and especially notable is the degree of hate crimes being committed against Asian children in America's schools. Yes, it is true that media depictions normalize anti-Asian attitudes, but it is the apathy, or particpation of institutions and authorities that uphold this normalization of racist behaviours.

Vilifying and criminalizing Asians who have been pushed over the edge emotionally and physically by persistent racial harassment or violence in their daily lives, and probably compounded by routine and pervasive anti-Asian racism in America's media, is tantamount to legitimizing the practice. In regards to this latter point it is worth remembering that there is a scene in the recent Men In Black III movie in which the two heroes find humour in racial murder and employ slapstick violence to basically re-enact the racist murder of Vincent Chin - turning racial violence against Asians into a normal function of the interaction with Asian people. It should be no surprise then, that some Asians are pushed to the very edge of endurance in the face of persistent and pervasive racism.

On this score we should also remember the death of Asian-American soldier, Danny Chen, who committed suicide after enduring weeks of racial abuse from other members of his unit. His tormentors are likely to be punished with a severe slap on the wrist. It would seem that these are the choices offered to Asian-Americans; endure racism passively and good naturedly or commit suicide. The third choice of defending yourself and your family in the same way that white Americans are expected to (after all, the hero who, often violently, stands up to oppression is glorified in American culture), is gravely discouraged at the best of times, and punished at the worst.

In the case of Pham (and the Korean immigrants in the 1992 pogrom), they were doing what any decent father would do; defending their families. That makes Pham a hero in my book.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Five Little Words

Shit Asian Girls Say to Asian Men

A commenter (mwei) linked to this video that made me cackle! Enjoy......




I think that most Asian guys living in America have been told all or most of these things by some Asian girl or another at some point in their lives. I've had this experience twice and both times the girls involved embarrassed themselves more than they bothered me.

The first time this happened I was on a road trip and had stopped at a 711 type store, somewhere in Houston. As I came out I noticed an Asian girl walking in. Since she was also Asian I presumed that she wouldn't mind helping a brother with directions. LOL. As I got closer and as I said "Excuse me" she turned her nose up and said "I like white guys" and brushed past me. Then an older white dude who I hadn't noticed walking just behind her asked me if I needed something and so I asked him for the directions. He seemed happy to help me. Funny thing was, he turned out to be her partner or friend and seemed embarrassed by her behaviour and was actually decent enough to fuss at her for being rude. She blushed and blinked sheepishly.

The second time this happened was even more bizarre. A white girl I was dating had an uncle in his fifties who had recently married an Asian-American girl of 26, and he thought it would be a good idea to to have my girlfriend and I over for dinner since there was this "Asian connection thingy". Well it wasn't a good idea. Apparently, he hadn't told his wife that I was Asian - I think he wanted to surprise her with how progressive his family was - so guess what she said when she saw me? That's right, as I reached out my hand to greet her she said something like "I like white guys!" and then looked at me with confusion (who knows why she was confused - even more importantly, who cares?). I looked over at my girlfriend and then at her uncle and I could see that they were wearing the same tight, mirthless, smile that I knew was spread across my face. Anyways, it was an uncomfortable night, with a lot of tight smiles, fake mutual interest, and disingenuous calls to "do it again sometime". But at least the food seemed authentic.

Hope you enjoyed the video and it made you laugh. That is one of the first steps in getting passed this IR disparity thing - laugh at people like that, then ignore them, and finally find a voice that makes you a shaper of the culture that brought about the situation that makes people ashamed and embarrassed to be with others of their own race.

I don't write (or even think) about the IR disparity with anger because I just don't care who people date or marry. And I think that the endless discussions about it do little to change the situation and may, in fact, harm the community because all the other issues that we face receive far less attention or even passion than this one subject. The fact is, you can't change people, you just can't and the more you tell people that something is bad or not to your liking, then the more they will want to do it. Yet, there is no doubt that if a situation exists within a society in which it is considered shameful, undesirable, or embarrassing to date or marry others like yourself then there is something seriously wrong.

But that doesn't mean we should set out on pointless rants at individuals because that changes nothing  - remember it is almost impossible to convince someone out of something that they believe. You can't force an alcoholic into sobriety, and you can't force someone who has been inculcated with demeaning stereotypes about their race to not feel shame about their race. People cannot and will not be changed according to someone else's will.

I think it is actually far easier to change a culture than to change an individual, and if you do want individuals to agree your way of thinking, then it is their culture that you have to change because people follow the trends of their culture. If you let yourself be dragged down into the dialog of the IR disparity and the flighty choices of Asian quasi-feminism then you're allowing the society that demeans you to dictate your voice and purpose. Even worse, you are giving too much voice and influence to people who have little to say other than "I only date white guys". Airheads have the most influential voices in our community because everyone reacts to those five little words. It's no wonder Asians catch a lot of shit.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Are Asians Becoming Whiter?

The Diversity Paradox.

I recently finished a book called "The Diversity Paradox" written by couple of sociologists (I believe) that collates information taken from the most recent census and extrapolates on the changing face of America's ethnic make-up and the way in which this is changing America's view of race and race relations. The study asks how, or if, the increasing numbers of immigrants from Latin America and Asia are changing white America's relationships and attitudes towards its ethnic minorities and suggests that high inter-marriage between Asians or Latinos with whites might be creating a new ethnic line of demarcation in which whites, Asians, and Latinos fall on one side of the barrier, and a disadvantaged black group on the other.

Overall, I thought that the book was very thoroughly researched but I found myself noticing that many of the suggested conclusions of the study defied my observations and presented an overly optimistic (and, even unrealistic) view of the nature of race-relations in America, both in the present and for the future, and seemed to overlook some vital aspects of the Asian-American experience that might have cast doubt on the book's conclusions.

For instance, having spent almost the entire book exploring the idea that high out-marriage rates of Asian-Americans (women, that is) might indicate a blurring of the boundary between white and Asian groups and be leading to greater integration and assimilation (and hence, I presume, greater tolerance), the authors add a half paragraph disclaimer at the back of the book that "there are gender differences (in out-marriage rates) that require further study". Uh-huh. That, to me, renders the conclusions of the previous chapters somewhat inconclusive. But more about this later.

To cover this book, I've focused on two conclusions the study makes, one of which I thought was contentious the other was simply worthy of comment, so I'm not claiming this to be a comprehensive critique.

The first point that the book makes and with which I agree, is the observation that immigrants choose to align with whiteness as opposed to blackness. This is interesting because at the time of early Asian immigration, although blacks were classified as citizens, Asians argued for citizenship based on the idea that they were white and thus eligible even though they could have just have easily (and who knows, perhaps more successfully) argued that they were eligible based on being "black".

So, almost built into the process of acceptance into the privileged class (particularly for a visible minority like Asians) involved an implicit acknowledgement, and perhaps even acquiescence to the notion of an inevitable inferior social status of the black under-class. Interestingly, even since the early days of non-European immigration America's racism created a perceived need for separation amongst its visible minorities as one of the means to maintain the racial hierarchy.  In recent years, there has been a blurring of this phenomenon, in the sense that aligning with blacks culturally has become fashionable, although it has to be said that white Americans seem as likely to do this as are immigrant groups.

It is also interesting to note that for Asian-Americans in the culture business, this process of aligning with whiteness has become the most likely avenue of success for those aspiring to mainstream recognition. Hence, much creative work produced by Asian-Americans involves an exaggerated depiction of Asian cultural and human backwardness, an obsequious deference to an imagined concept of white cultural perfection, as well as an almost universal absence of non-white and non-Asian characters, and even perhaps a deliberate blindness to wider social issues that might highlight negative aspects of the white culture that is being aspired to.

The next point of interest is the suggestion that inter-marriage indicates blurring of racial and social boundaries and even, perhaps, acceptance into mainstream society and can be seen as the final step to full assimilation. According to sociologists inter-marriage is the final boundary that is overcome by immigrant groups leading to full integration or assimilation. Recalling the experiences of immigrants from Ireland, Italy, and Eastern Europe, it had been noted that inter-marriage seemed to be an indication of society's acceptance of these groups as true Americans and led (or coincided) with increased prosperity and social empowerment. Yet, I cannot help but feel as though applying this reasoning to Asian-Americans ignores huge aspects of the Asian experience that were not faced by these earlier Caucasian immigrants, and which continue to be a barrier to Asian-Americans in the present.

Because Asian-Americans grow up in a society that routinely denigrates them, their race, racial characteristics, and their cultures, many of them develope negative attitudes towards themselves and others who look like them. This attitude is often and routinely expressed by Asian-Americans from internet forums and online communities, to works of literature and film but the fact is that Asian children in America learn one thing from American culture and that is to feel shame and embarrassment about themselves. It is a constant stream of exposure to the ubiquitous portrayals and images of Asian deficiencies that proliferate throughout American culture that is the basis upon which many Asians form their ideas about themselves and their identities - naturally they tend not to hold their cultures, race, or even themselves, in high esteem.

This can only place doubt on the conclusion that inter-marriage with Asian-Americans somehow diminishes negative attitudes, or increases tolerance towards Asians because, quite simply, many Asians themselves adopt these negative attitudes. So even though at this point I couldn't state categorically that Asian high out-marriage rates do not increase tolerance, I think it is reasonable to say that cultural denigration of Asians creates a sense of shame and a desire for distance from their culture of origin and ethnicity. Anecdotally, I (and I'm sure many of you) have encountered a good number of Asian-Americans (both who out-date/marry or do not) who, at best, have few positive things to say about Asians, or at worst, are almost vehement in their hostility to their own race or culture. And, no, it's not just date-only-white-guys-Asian women who do this!

Of course, for the Asian minority, high out-marriage rates occur predominantly between Asian women and white men, whilst out-marriage rates for Asian men are relatively low. This should cast some degree of doubt on the conclusion of it being an indicator of improved attitudes because, historically, anti-miscegenation laws and attitudes were primarily designed to prevent white women from marrying or having relationships with minority men, whilst at the same time, white men were routinely engaging in miscegenation with black or Asian women. Because anti-miscegenation had traditionally focused on preventing Asian men from assimilating into mainstream culture it would seem more reasonable to take out-marriage rates for Asian men as a more accurate gauge of a general decrease in negative attitudes.

These out-marriage differences within the Asian community suggests that, at best, it might be more accurate to say that in addition to racial lines that are being re-drawn, for the Asian community there is also a gender line being drawn within the community, with Asian women having smoother access to, and therefore falling on, the "white" side of the divide and Asian men outside of it. The gender imbalance in out-marriage rates for Asian men and women only indicates that it is, perhaps, Asian women who are being "promoted" into whiteness and that the gender differences that are perfunctorily acknowledged at the end of the book is actually indicative of an increasingly profound social separation between Asian men and women. You can think of this as a kind of model minority within a model minority.

Consider also that it has been estimated that between 1945 and 1965 there was something in the region of 100,000 marriages between American G.Is and Asian "war brides", yet, during that period and the subsequent twenty years, attitudes towards Asians didn't really improve and it could be argued that anti-Asianism increased beginning around the late 1970's and continuing, perhaps to this day. So altogether I think it is a dubious claim that inter-marriage carries with it an implicit and inevitable decrease in negative attitudes towards Asians - if high out-marriage rates of Asian women in the 1950's and 60's didn't decrease racism, why should we reasonably believe that it is having this effect now?.

Finally, the biggest obstacle to the Asian minority becoming fully accepted and assimilated (and which is not addressed in the book) lies in the unique political and historical relationship between the US and various Asian countries. Historically, America's attitude towards Asia is founded on its past colonial aspirations. Because America has historically seen itself in civilizational conflict with Asian nations, its attitudes towards Asian people has been and remains, combative, uncompromising, xenophobic, hostile, and intolerant. This is evident to this day - political rhetoric often exhibits these types of qualities and, as I often point out, American culture is suffused with a sadistic violence in its portrayals of Asian men. In fact, recent studies that show Asian children experience high levels of racial harassment from peers and that in the workplace Asians are harassed for any reason, would also indicate that the high inter-marriage rates have so far done little to promote tolerance.

Because immigrants from Europe have never had to overcome this type of civilizational antagonism they have not had to endure the protracted xenophobic stereotyping, political combativeness, and uncompromising hostility that characterizes the Asian experience. I would suggest that anti-Asian attitudes are as common and widely-held now as they were at the time of the Exclusion Acts and the Second World War. It is because Asian children are exposed to hateful images and stereotypes that many of them adopt these same attitudes making it highly plausible that marrying an Asian-American is unlikely to contribute to an increase tolerance or positive attitudes towards Asian people.

Monday, June 4, 2012

Hollywood's Anti-Asian Tourette's

Hitting Chinese Is Fun.
 
I came across this article just today from the ever-Sino-xenophobic British news site, The Daily Mail, in which we learn that China is censoring around 15 minute long scene from the movie, Men In Black III. Funnily enough, I just saw this movie this past weekend and was in the process of writing a post about this very scene! Apparently, China's censors have taken exception to the scene for seemingly vastly different reasons than I have - that is if you choose to believe the spin from an explicitly hostile-to-East-Asians publication.

In the offending scene the two heroes - Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones - enter a typically Hollywood hate-inspired version of a Chinese restaurant (complete with disgusting hygiene, disgusting food sources, and dirty Chinese employees) and proceed to interrogate the restaurant's owner, who, it turns out happens to be an actual slimy alien, as opposed to an actual slimy Chinaman. Either way, he is a filthy and disgusting alien possessing none of the common values of decency, hygiene, and courage, that America holds dear. In fact, he possesses the same characteristics that America most often attributes to Asian people (especially men), so, even though he is an alien in disguise as an Asian, he actually possesses the disgusting qualities that Hollywood also insists Asians possess.

Almost as an inevitable consequence of this self-evident lack of humanity the Chinese, alien, Chinese Alien is violently interrogated by Tommy Lee Jones during which he is repeatedly hit about the head with an object and ridiculed, with Will Smith in the background making light of the whole mindless and casually violent episode with his cheerful quippiness. In the ensuing fight all of the "Chinese" employees turn out to be aliens and suffer an epic ass-whipping - one of whom is brutally beaten with a pan until he falls to ground dead, the side of his head caved in.

Of course, there is a kind of absurd violence that is characteristic of the whole Men In Black franchise - the fight scenes are filled with aliens who explode into a green goo or whose deaths are cartoonishly gruesome - but you won't find many (if any at all) with the sadistic brutality exhibited in the restaurant scene. American culture has a perverse love for this type of explicit depiction of cold, frenzied violence against Asian men and it may be the most common manner in which Asian men are represented in Americas's media. In fact, as this fight scene from the 1950's movie, The Manchurian Candidate, the depiction of sadistic violence against Asian men has been popular for decades.........



That scene was one of the first instances where I had seen any kind of depiction of an Asian man and the experience opened my eyes - especially that maniacal sadism at the end in which the Asian man lies defeated at Sinatra's feet receiving his brutal comeuppance for not knowing his place. What I came to realize is that America, as expressed through its culture, views itself as being locked in some kind of heroic conflict with Asia in which any and all means of violence are justified. This is as true now as it was in the 1950's, and has been true ever since the first Western warships sailed into Asian ports to claim Asian territories for themselves.

It should come as no surprise that the Asian-American experience in the 21st Century is often characterized by frenzied violence arising seemingly out of nowhere and manifesting as random acts of sadistic rage, yet paradoxically - and chillingly - there is a casualness about anti-Asian violence that is empowered by widespread social indifference. These types of depictions document, propagate, and perhaps even create, America's cultural  acceptance and maybe even desire for violence against Asian people.

In fact, I would suggest that this attitude is so ingrained in Americas's consciousness that it has become integral to the American identity, so much so that these American expressions of "two minutes hate" have a "Tourettes" quality about them. This example from the Men In Black is a clear case of this - the whole scene would have worked just as well without the sadistic violence, which seems to manifest out of nowhere, for no reason pertinent to the plot, and for no other reason than to express sadistic violence towards Asians yet occurring almost reflexively.

Of course, none of this would seem relevant if it weren't for the fact that violence towards Asians seems to be a normalized and an accepted mode of interaction for mainstream Americans with its East Asian minority. Racially biased bullying and violence towards Asian children in America's schools is extremely common and often goes unaddressed by school authorities. Mirroring widespread movie depictions of comically casual, sadistic, violence, some Asian kids are beaten for the fun of it. Then there's the hilarious practice of throwing old Asian people onto train tracks. Of course, there is the racially inflected harassment and  violence towards Asian merchants both in the inner cities and the suburbs as well as escalating degrees of harassment in the workplace. Everywhere you look the violence and harassment of Asian people is characterized by its casualness and often sheer sadistic enjoyment in its perpetration.

At this point a causative relationship between casual violence against Asians in the media and real life hasn't been determined (but who is investigating?), but there's little doubt that the absence of mainstream opposition suggests that America is comfortable, or even enjoys, the fantasy of inflicting sadistic violence on Asian men. Consider, for example, if the characters at the receiving end of this violence in the Men In Black movie had been African-American - my guess is that it wouldn't have made it passed the editing room.

Sunday, June 3, 2012

Some White Women Like Asian Guys.

A Good Reason To Struggle Academically?

I probably shouldn't be so facetious about this story but I'll say what many of us are thinking but might not feel comfortable expressing! According to this story (and here) a married 36-year-old teacher engaged in a sexual relationship with her 16-year-old-student.........
[the] high-school English teacher allegedly plied their son with cannabis and repeatedly had sex with him in her office....Married teacher Erin Sayar, 36, was meant to be tutoring Kevin Eng twice a week at James Madison High School in Brooklyn, New York - but their relationship quickly took a sexual turn.
I'm sure that many sixteen-year-olds would consider this to be the perfect girlfriend. The teacher carried out a year-long affair with student, Kevin Eng (whom I presume is Asian), whilst she was suppose to be tutoring him. The affair was discovered after the student's girlfriend became suspicious after witnessing the couple flirting with each other, and then alerted authorities. Killjoy.

The truth is, when guys hear stories of 16 year-old boys being seduced by their teachers we tend to be far less disgusted by it than if we hear of a male teacher taking advantage of a 16 year-old girl. The reason is that many of us could only have wished that one of our own hot teachers would have given us cannabis and seduced us when we were sixteen.

Personally, I wouldn't have complained if a female teacher had shown that kind of interest. Of course, if I were a parent I would imagine that there is a great degree of anxiety over trust being broken and that is understandable. But, I wonder if the student involved will ever come to feel as though he was taken advantage of, or if he will remember the whole experience with fondness? Maybe that's a dumb question.

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't.....

 The Chinaman's Chance.

Via Angry Asian Man, this very interesting article in the Atlantic on a study that provides evidence of anti-Asian discrimination in the workplace. According to the article....
The dominant East Asian employee was more disliked than the non-dominant East Asian employee, the non-dominant White employee, and the dominant White employee. A separate trial showed that participants held descriptive stereotypes of East Asians as being competent, cold, and non-dominant, while another showed that the most valued expectation of East Asians was that they "stay in their place."
This really doesn't surprise me. As any Asian man like myself who has been in a position of authority over non-Asian people, assuming a supervisory role often brings out the anti-Asian racism in co-workers.

But this is not all. Here's the full study which reveals some very interesting findings. According to the study.......
.....the stereotype of East Asians as less dominant than Whites is prescriptive in addition to being descriptive: It was considered significantly less desirable for East Asians than for Whites to be dominant......... The discrepancy between the characteristics East Asians are perceived to have (more competence and less warmth than Whites) and the characteristics considered desirable for East Asians to have (similar competence and warmth to Whites) lends support to our idea that a prescription for East Asians to be relatively nondominant helps to mitigate the social and economic threats posed by descriptive stereotypes of East Asians.......
  ......The dominant East Asian employee was relatively disliked as a coworker compared to the non-dominant East Asian employee, the non-dominant White employee, and the dominant White employee.
Even in this majority Asian sample, people preferred a White coworker over an Asian coworker if that coworker had a dominant personality......
These results suggest that dominant East Asians are unwelcome and unwanted by their coworkers. Employees who are unwelcome and unwanted are at greater risk of being mistreated and harassed in their work environments.......
Prior research has shown that employees who violate prescriptive gender stereotypes are more likely to be sexually harassed, consistent with the idea that disparate treatment is triggered by the violation of prescriptive stereotypes. We propose that the same dynamic is likely to occur for violations of prescriptive racial stereotypes, so that employees who violate these stereotypes are more likely to be racially harassed at work......
East Asians reported experiencing more racial harassment at work than other employees, highlighting the importance of studying discrimination against East Asians in the workplace despite the portrayal of East Asians as a “model minority” that escapes discriminatory treatment. Importantly, East Asians who violated racial stereotypes were the ones targeted for racial harassment; East Asians who “stayed in their place” did not experience more racial harassment than other employees........
As predicted, East Asians who were dominant, and thereby violated a descriptive and a prescriptive racial stereotype, were subjected to more racial harassment than other employees. East Asians who were warm, and thereby violated the descriptive stereotype of being cold, were also subjected to more harassment. 

The short response to this is that it is all pretty fucked up, and in a number of ways. In summary, Asians who behave in ways incongruent with the irrational and racist stereotypes (meek and  distant) created by American culture are liked less than those whose behaviour adheres to these stereotypes. Subsequently, Asians who exhibit leadership qualities or who otherwise behave in unstereotypical ways become targets of racial harassment from their white co-workers. Furthermore, Asians are more likely to be subject to racial harassment in the workplace than other groups. Most insidious of all is the finding that Asians whose behaviour contradicts the stereotype of Asians being distant and cold (by being warm), are actually liked less than Asians who are perceived to be cold and distant.

Hence, the title of this post. The phrase "the Chinaman's Chance" is believed to have been coined during the  start of the Golden Era (which perhaps continues to this day) of anti-Asian prejudice and hatred in the mid-nineteenth century. In short, it  expresses the idea of having absolutely zero chance. This study strongly suggests that the sentiments embodied in the phrase "the Chinaman's Chance" are going strong in American society and affect the experience of Asian-Americans in the 21st century. American society promotes hostility towards Asians for being meek, cold and distant, but also expresses hostility when Asians are warm, and exhibit leadership qualities.

America's stereotypes of Asians serve the purpose of creating a cultural filter that provides a framework or template that guides the behaviour of mainstream America towards its Asian minority. Because these stereotypes are demeaning, dehumanizing, and xenophobic, they promote hostility and distrust of Asian people and normalize racial baiting and harassment - it is considered perfectly normal for America's media and its personalities to promote racial harassment of Asians through casual but pervasive mockery.

Thus, stereotypical qualities like submissiveness, and emotional coldness serve to allow mainstream America to feel justified in its anti-Asian hostility - if you deny a deserved promotion to an Asian worker it's not because you don't like Asians but because (true to stereotype) they lack leadership qualities, or if you express racially inflected dislike of your Asian co-worker it's not racism  because (true to stereotype) they are just cold and distant. The latter is even a justification for racial baiting because you are not actually being racist after all - your cold and distant Asian co-worker just needs to lighten up! Thus, casual anti-Asian racism has a socially legitimate and normalized avenue of expression.

This study adds another layer to this casual anti-Asian prejudice in that overcoming stereotypes is less about overcoming ignorance - if it was about ignorance then people wouldn't have a problem with Asians with warm personalities - and is more about overcoming the apparently overwhelming  desire of American society (and the individuals who comprise it) to maintain their anti-Asian hostility. They just don't want to let go of their anti-Asian racism. Why else would the normally strongly desired qualities of human warmth and strong personality cause white Americans to increase the expression of their hostility towards Asian people?

I think that many Asian-Americans would like to believe that stereotypes are the product of ignorance and not malice because this is, quite simply, easier to take than accepting the reality that anti-Asianism is a cynically nurtured attitude that is profoundly embedded in the worldview of America. Just like any belief, when Asian stereotypes are challenged by observeable reality, its adherents become enraged and attempt to re-assert the worldview that they have become comfortable with and which, perhaps, reinforces their own view of themselves relative to the reality facing them.

Similarly, it might be the case that some Asians are also too comfortable with the idea that America's cultural anti-Asianism doesn't exist as a malicious endeavour propagated with careful deliberation and intent. After all, addressing attitudes that are propagated with malicious intent is far more difficult and oppositional than simply dismissing them as ignorant. And as reflected in some of Asian-America's most mainstreamed cultural output it is easier if you characterize the Asian experience as the fundamental failure of Asians to adapt, or the backwardness of Asian cultures and not so much the result of hostility with intent. Of course, this may help to partially explain the aversion (uncovered in the study) that Asians themselves seem to hold towards Asian leaders.

Of course, none of this means that Asian-Americans have an insurmountable task in overcoming prejudice - it simply offers us an insight into the potential (or probable) obstacles we might face as we, no doubt will, assume more positions of leadership in society. Understanding the nature of a problem is a primary step in learning how to overcome it. If we continue to pretend that anti-Asian prejudice is the result of ignorance, and not malicious intent, then we will continue to miss the opportunity to confront it effectively as individuals, communities, and as an autonomous culture.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

OUCH!!

"What Did You Call Me?"


This is not Asian specific but it's hilarious. The video is from a Turkish soccer match and the backstory is that in the two teams previous meeting the Turkish player in the yellow and blue shirt, had used a racial slur against the black player. In the following video you will see the black player's response in their next meeting. Enjoy..........



MLK he isn't but he is definitely concise. LOL!

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

A Perfect Crime.......

The L.A Riots.

It's hard to believe that twenty years have passed since the Los Angeles riots erupted into the most violent urban disturbance in recent history. Although the US has seen many riots in its cities over the years, the LA riots were somewhat unique because the racial antagonism went beyond the traditional white/black hostility and brought to light racist attitudes between ethnic minorities.

Of course, although it was the acquittal of the policemen who participated in the beating of Rodney King that sparked the rampage, in the ensuing days it was the tension and hostility between the African-American and immigrant Korean community that became the focus of the media's commentary and attention. During the unrest, Korean businesses were targeted by the mob who first looted and then set fire to them.

Naturally, the disturbance was turned into a major television event by a media who, with a good degree of cynicism, chose to spin the riot like an old-time movie in which the various parties involved were characterized as good-guys and victims (the rioters), bad-guys (the Koreans), and the well-meaning but helpless (the police). Its fair to say that fair and unbiased reporting seemed to go out the window - particularly in their coverage of the reaction of some Korean shop-owners.

As you may discern from this report from 1992 - which to me is a good example of the uncompromising and reproachful character of the media's attitude towards the Koreans - the fact that these shop-keepers were defending themselves and their property elicited much sickening condemnation from many self-righteous observers whose own lives and livelihoods were not under threat, but who seemed to insist on a saintly martyr approach to racially motivated mob violence by those who were targeted.

What is most striking to me is how, both then and now, the racist targeting of the Koreans by the mob has been either ignored, denied, or justified as an understandable act by a frustrated minority. Even coverage of the riots in Europe, where I was living at the time, sought to villify the Korean immigrants and characterize the violence being committed against them as somehow deserved.

Of course, in truth, the 1992 riots came at a time when anti-Asian hostility in America was particularly prevalent. The 1970's and 80's had seen some of the most overt and blatant anti-Asian rhetoric in politics and mainstream American culture. The 1970's and 80's had been a time of anxiety for the American economy because of stiff competition in the manufacturing sector from several East Asian countries. Resentment caused by the perception that these Asian competitors were taking American jobs was compounded by xenophobic attitudes that these nations were being diabolically underhanded or unfair in the way that they were developing their economies.

Consequently, American attitudes at the time reflected this hostility. The period was was full of anti-Asian political rhetoric, calls for boycotts, and retaliatory measures (often martial in nature) against Asians supposedly "cheating" their way to economic power. Culturally, the Asian bad guy became a staple for movies throughout the era and a general hostility towards Asian people was pervasive (in fact this is largely still true). This was the backdrop to the racist murder of Vincent Chin in 1982. Chin was bludgeoned to death by two very angry and unemployed white men, because they apparently blamed their unemployment on Asians and wanted to vent their anger through violent murder.

In a strange way, the targeting of Korean immigrants during the LA riots is fundamentally a crime of similar character as the murder of Chin, the only difference being that the Koreans were able to defend themselves more effectively - if this had not been the case my guess is that dozens of Koreans would have been killed. In both cases, widespread cultural xenophobia and hostility towards Asians that had been nurtured in the media, society, and politically, served to normalize the resentment and irrational anger that drove the mob violence. In the aftermath, the anti-Asian racism that made violent anger inevitable also served as a justification for the violence - after all, the Asians are sneakily taking jobs and money out of American communities.

And this is how it was possible to commit the perfect crime. Fully televised, and in full view of the entire world, a racially motivated pogrom that would have made the Nazis proud was carried out against a Korean immigrant community with the full perverse approval of the watching media and a resentful society seemingly rabid about the prospect of hitting Asians where it hurts. In some ways, in the pogrom of 1992, Korean immigrants became the focus for the simmering rage of an economically affronted America. Thus, the hate crime committed against Korean immigrants - and the general anti-Asian racism that enabled it - was marginalized from the story. Instead of becoming a means to highlight pervasive anti-Asian prejudice, the riots highlighted America's tolerance and full acceptance of it and made certain that this aspect of the story would not become part of the accepted history.

Like a perfect crime in an Agatha Christie novel in which a crime of murder becomes hidden within a crime of theft, the story of racist victimization of Korean immigrants was buried (and remains largely buried) and given lesser significance than the stories of the mob who committed it. America's anti-Asian racism ensures that empathy towards their experience will be rejected and their desperate (and brave) acts of self-defence - made necessary by police indifference - will continue to be irrationally and self-righteously condemned.

There were two perpetrators in the pogrom against Korean immigrants - the mob but also (and perhaps even more significantly) the general cultural racism that first enabled it, then provided the means to justify and downplay the racist crime that it was, and finally re-wrote history to exclude this aspect of the story from the accepted accounts.

Saturday, April 21, 2012

Asian-American Movies.....

....Are They Bad?

The 8Asians blog has an article posted recently in which the post author, Edward Hong, asks the question; "Why Are Asian-American Films Bad?" That, I think, is a very good and valid question, and one which when posed, will most often elicit some response of defensiveness or even attack on behalf of those being criticized (which is probably understandable). Hong's post suggests that pervasive and beyond-tired "Asian-American" themes of identity crises and inter-cultural confusions may be so self-limiting that the end product can only be repetitively mediocre at best.

I would have to agree with Hong - sadly, the Asian-American themed movies that I have seen have been mostly dull or unengaging. As I explained here, what seems to be lacking in Asian-American film  is a worldview, or point of view that acts as a foundation upon which to derive meaningful ideas - a film without ideas is a poor film. Maybe it is because of this that there isn't much that I have ever taken away from an Asian-American movie that has made me think, or challenged my beliefs in any way - which to me is the difference between a great movie experience and a pointless one.

Why this state of affairs exists is difficult to say. I do maintain that there is a lack of autonomy in Asian-American creative endeavours in the sense that there seems to be an underlying axiom that the product of an Asian artist's work only has value if it is appreciated by mainstream (yes, that means white) audiences. What this translates to, perhaps, is that Asian-American films are deliberately non-threatening or non-provocative for the sake of mainstream audiences, so maybe there is some degree of self-censorship that debilitates the Asian-American film-making process. This, of course, is sad because I believe that the Asian experience in the modern world (both within the US and outside of it) is hugely significant both historically and for the future.

I have come to believe that the basis for culture - and perhaps the basis of creative honesty - are to a great degree derived form the individual and communal experience of historical circumstances. I maintain that the Asian-American voice is fundamentally out of step with this history, and is instead informed by the biased version of our historical experiences as propagated by mainstream America. This is my the biggest issue with Asian-American film - its uncritical acceptance of the mainstream historical perspective which, effectively, stifles an autonomous viewpoint or opinion. Asian history of the past couple of centuries and our experience of racism necessarily places our stories into an oppositional stance to mainstream American culture, yet this doesn't manifest in Asian-American films.

Maybe this is why Asian-American films just seem not to be saying anything and why they seemingly lack the strong point of view that I look for in movies that might make me think or perhaps even challenge my view of the world.

Monday, April 16, 2012

Stepping Outside The Comfort Zone

Dating Non-Asian Women......

Masir Jones over at the Destroy & Rebuild blog just posted a piece in which he notices the "cliquish" behaviour of some Asian-American women, in particular how so many of them just don't seem open to being approached by Asian men. I agree with everything he wrote, but I will say that women of all races - if they are out with a group of girlfriends - will more or less act in a similar manner. There does, however, seem to be a major difference between Asian-American girls and non-Asian-American girls that I think partially explains this experience that Asian men seem to have of feeling made to jump over higher hurdles than, let's say, white men, perhaps.

Of course, it is bizarre that white, Hispanic, and black women might seem to be more open to being approached by Asian men than would Asian-American women (in my experience, non-Asian women are definitely more open to Asian men) and most often the reasons given for this state of affairs places a good portion of the blame on Asian cultures and Asian men themselves.

Whatever the reasons, the one factor that is common to every instance of Asian men's interactions with the opposite sex is that the Asian man is going up against the weight of cultural stereotyping that denigrates, ridicules, and demeans him. Any woman who dates, or marries, an Asian man in this society is swimming against a current of cultural certainty that Asian men are the worst option or simply dysfunctional in some way. And this I think, offers an explanation for why non-Asian women would seem more open to Asian men.

It might be cultural factors or simply result of racially toned marginalization from mainstream society, but when it comes to going against the current of public opinion, it seems that non-Asian women are the leaders. It seems natural, therefore, that non-Asian women would be more inclined to go against the group or clique when approached by Asian men.

This is an important point for Asian men simply because American culture has rendered Asian men so completely invisible and irrelevent that it takes partners who are strong and wise enough to see through the bullshit to take the time with us. It is the rebels and those who value the prerogative of the individual over the opinions of the group who are open to Asian men. And that is a very good thing.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

He'll Charm The Pants Off Of You...

Heejun Hun

Via Angry Asian Man......



Also, here.

To my mind this Heejun Hun interview is a great illustration of how personality will beat out good looks any day. It's fair to say that Hun doesn't have male-model good-looks, but his charm more than makes up for it.

Of particular interest is his rapport with the woman interviewing him. Now in my experience, if you are able to make a girl giggle like that then you have one hand almost in the cookie jar.

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Asian Men Less Bastardly Than Previously Thought

New Study.......

A recent study on interracial marriage rates in the US has been making the rounds in the Asian-American blogoverse, the main point of interest being a slight decline in the high outmarriage rates of Asian-American women with white men. Here's the NY Times report. As you can read from the NY Times article, some Asian-American women have experienced a kind of disillusionment with dating white guys because they have come to the realization that much of the attraction to them seems to actually be based on objectification. The bigWOWO blog also has an interesting post about this, as well as a stimulating discussion in the comments section.

Feminist blogger, Shiuan Butler, has also posted on the article, and has included some more in-depth charts showing the specifics of IR marriage trends. And some very interesting things show up particularly on this chart. .......



What is interesting here are the numbers for white woman/Asian man pairings. As you can see, of all pairings of white women, those who marry Asian men report a higher average earning capacity, as well as a slightly higher percentage who have had an income within the previous 12 months.

Why is this interesting? One of the stereotypes that are happily and casually put forward about Asian men is that they are irredeemable sexist pigs whose suffocatingly backward attitudes to women's equality makes them unsuitable partners for the modern emancipated woman. Yet these figures would seem to tell a different story. 

According to the data, white women who marry Asian men have a high earning capacity, over 90% of them continue to earn during the marriage (at least within the previous 12 months), and almost 60% are college educated. What this might imply is that Asian men who marry white women seek out partners who accomplished in their careers, are educated, and who continue to pursue their earning potential. 

To me, this suggests that contrary to the claim that Asian men suffocate the aspirations of their wives, many Asian men are, in fact, more likely to seek partners who are the opposite to the meek, submissive, woman that we are informed are the type that Asian men prefer. Even compared to other ethnic groups (including white men) white women who marry Asian men show possibly a greater degree of accomplishment which in turn suggests Asian men are more comfortable with empowered women than every other group. What kind of sexist pig would be partnered with an accomplished and educated woman? Maybe one who isn't actually as sexist as some would like to believe.

This brings up some interesting questions on an aspect of the interracial dating debate that is never really explored; what are some of the reasons for Asian-American men to marry outside of their race. We hear ad-nauseum about the billions of reasons why Asian women choose to marry outside of the race, but never why Asian men might do the same. 

Monday, April 2, 2012

My Brother's Keeper

Asian Representation By Asians.....

The YouOffendMeYouOffendMyFamily blog published a post recently about a movie project that is in the works from one of the blog's writers, Quentin Lee. The project is being described as a "slasher" movie, in which the protagonist is an Asian man who has been driven psychotic as a result of pervasive racial denigration and stereotyping throughout his life. As you can see from the comments section of the post, this premise has elicited some degree of opposition. But what most interested me was some of the dialogue in the comments section in which a couple of points are made with which I happen to disagree. This is the first comment of interest...
“White” films are able to tell whatever stories they want. Because no one film portrays their race. There’s enough of them that it’s not an issue. Asian films from Asia are the same. So in order for this to stop being an issue for Asian-American films, there must be enough, where the variety and volume of films won’t warrant the discussion. But we can’t achieve that without supporting ALL works, regardless of what it’s about.
I simply disagree with this because "white" films well and truly do represent the white race on many levels. The industry's machinations seem set up to ensure that white actors land most of the meaty roles and production funding and hence the story-telling most often reflects all the good things that white America wants to believe about itself. Although it is certainly true that white movies show some white characters as evil, their negative qualities are always off-set by other white people who possess the "right" values that exemplify the awesomeness of white culture and its values. Surely, this is "representing" the white race.

Furthermore, discrimination, as well as societal chauvinisms mean that the American film industry is monopolized by predominantly white producers and investors who favour white actors and "white" stories. This results in discrimination against Asian actors - particularly Asian men - which is a well-established and accepted practice within the industry. So to claim that mainstream (white) film-makers do not, as a matter of course, positively represent their race is a dubious claim at best.

The same commenter goes on to say the following.....

.......I strongly feel that Asian-American films are not obligated to be responsible for representing our race. Their only obligation is the representation of the Asian-American artist making it. The VOLUME of Asian-American films is going to determine and represent our culture. Not a single film. The aggregate will create the culture we’re all so concerned about representing...
This  idea that the Asian artist has no obligation to represent their race is a point of view that I have heard voiced by several Asian artists (mainly writers and film-makers). The suggestion seems to be that works of creativity carry with them an implicit freedom that cannot and should not be molded into a pre-packaged framework that might limit the very creative process itself. Often this defence is offered in response to criticisms that the work of Asian artists often focuses on the negative aspects of Asian cultures and people (in much the same way that the mainstream media does) so instead of promoting an alternative and positive representations it simply reinforces existing stereotypes and characteristics created by non-Asians that limit the definition and concept of what it might mean to be Asian.

In some cases - many cases, perhaps - this is a valid and accurate assessment of the way that, what is termed "Asian-American arts" conceives of itself and its work in relation to the mainstream. It seems to me that there is often a drive to produce work that is palatable to mainstream America, and thus commercial considerations (i.e. the sellability of a product to mainstream America) play a major role in how Asian artists may seek to portray Asian people. Yet, this is something of a conundrum that I've never really heard anyone address. Allowing one's work to be defined by mainstream sensibilities - something that many Asian artists seem happy to do - is itself limiting and no less so (and possibly even more so) than the expectation that artists should represent the community. Surely the pressures of commercial aspirations are as much of a compromise of creative expression as is any obligation to represent the race?

Perhaps this is why Asian-American creative output has generally been somewhat irrelevent in the broader context of modern western artistic endeavour - it seems that it all too often chooses the path of least resistance which may also happen to be the most limiting compromise. A significant issue in discussing this subject is one of definitions. When we say "Asian-American arts", what exactly does that mean? What exactly does it mean to "represent the race" and why on earth would anyone do such a thing?

It is entirely possible (probable even) that the term "Asian-American arts" is meaningless, yet it is used routinely and habitually to describe something, or a group of things, for which it is hopelessly incapable of describing. It is a catch-all phrase that says nothing about a point of view or a worldview. There is no Asian-American stylistic character (except perhaps a rather droll penchant for a fatalistic angst and cultural self-flagellation) and "Asian-American arts" doesn't describe a "movement" devoted to an idea or point of view and driven by a group of like-minded thinkers. Certainly the term does imply some kind of Asian-American worldview (which without a commitment to represent the race may actually be an oxymoron), but ultimately the term is so all-encompassing in its vagueness that it has no meaning.

This is important when considering the the idea of "representing the race". Why Asian-American artists would seem to be so vehemently opposed to this idea is bewildering, and their opposition explains why Asian-Americans have a "roll-your-eyes" attitude towards their own cultural "elite". After all, few people within the community would deny that negative media representation and hostile stereotyping have caused immense harm for the Asian minority. So, the simple response to the question of why Asian artists should represent their race is that we are in dire need of being fairly represented. Isn't that reason enough?

Furthermore, much of the endeavours of Asian-American activism involves complaints and protests against the media, and the hostile-to-Asians celebrities it regularly produces, in which it is demanded that mainstream America portray Asian characters respectfully and fairly.Yet, why should the mainstream be obliged to represent the Asian race fairly, when many - and sometimes well-known - Asian artists themselves see no reason to? This attitude itself enables mainstream apathy and cynicism in tackling the issue of fair and balanced media representation of Asian people and is a contradiction of one of the most widely supported tenets of Asian activism - the struggle to combat the propagation of anti-Asian attitudes and xenophobic political rhetoric by a hostile media.

Is it surprising that there seems to be such distrust and cynicism towards Asian-American artists from within their own community? Even more surprising is that Asian writers and film-makers are themselves shocked (and indignant) that Asians react negatively to the news that they don't have a commitment to represent their community, and that they might, indeed, be supplying mainstream America with more ammunition for their prejudices.

I think that ultimately, it may all come down to this idea of what it means when we use the term "Asian-American" in relation any creative endeavour . To me it doesn't mean anything, and much confusion would be averted if we dropped the term altogether when discussing work produced by Asian-American artists. That way there wouldn't be the expectation of some kind of representation and the artist could assert their creative identity. Perhaps this simple act would initiate the beginning of actual creative "movements" informed by the Asian-American experience (perhaps), that reflects an autonomous worldview and historical perspective, that relies less on squeezing the Asian narrative into restrictive mainstream American sensibilities and more on the power of its own original creative value to attract a following.