Western Ex-Pats Abuse Korean Woman...

... Asian Men At Fault.....

The 8Asians blog posted this commentary on some news out of Korea in which a couple of western (i.e.white) ex-pats in Seoul  take a video of themselves man-handling and abusing a Korean woman at a night club. The post links to a Washington Post report on the incident that, although ostensibly sympathetic to the Korean woman, turns out to be an apologetic, of sorts, for western racial attitudes towards Asians in general and for these abusive ex-pats in particular.

Let's look at the apparent facts of the incident first of all. According to the evidence of the video, a couple of western ex-pats have approached the girl, begin manhandling her in an extremely demeaning way, invading her personal space, touching her in disrespectful ways, mocking her, and eventually, when she decides to move away from them, they hurl verbal abuse after her.

The first few paragraphs of the WaPo article - written by a guy named Max Fisher - are extremely sympathetic to the girl, displaying some outrage at the treatment she has received. ......

what [the video] shows is so disturbing, so charged with deeply sensitive issues of gender and race....... it’s clear that the young Korean woman in the frame is in trouble.......They begin by describing her body, talking as if she weren’t there. One of the men pulls back her hair to show her chest to the camera. By 14 seconds in, it’s already clear she’s afraid, and she tries to wave them off as the first man puts his hand on her chin to push her face up.......as if bored with merely harassing her, they grow more sadistic. The first man sticks his finger up her nose. She pulls back to resist but he leans in and shouts, “I see a booger.” His friend eggs him on — “Dude, make her eat it,” he says — and the two burst into laughter when he shoves his finger, now smeared with snot, into the back of her throat. They tell her she’s disgusting. When one of them discovers some discoloration on her teeth, pulling her lips back to show to the camera, he starts shoving her, punishing her for displeasing him. He shouts at her to get plastic surgery, “like every other little Korean [girl].”....At first, when she tries to resist, he won’t let her go. But, after several thrashes, she’s able to pull herself away, clearly rattled, and walk off. They shout angrily after her, hurling insults, and the video ends.

My first thought was that these guys need to work on their game. My second thought was that the writer of the article seems to really capture the gender, cultural, and racial dynamic of the scene in his description. I will admit that I was looking forward to reading a non-Asian writer explore some of the issues of the race and gender issues of the Asian experience that are rarely mentioned in the mainstream. Instead, what I read seemed like a whitewash.

Starting at the sixth paragraph.....

[the video] had attracted over 24,000 views in its short life on YouTube, once the video was gone, discussion around it largely ended. One month later, on July 8, it was posted again, this time to Facebook. It is still up, having generated more than 800 comments, mostly in Korean, and it’s been shared 251 times. Outrage against the two Western men (it’s not quite clear where they’re from) has grown so fierce on the Korean Web that it’s been covered in several Korean outlets.

Thus begins the shift of focus away from the main issue of the video - ex-pats engaging in sexist and arguably racist behaviour towards a Korean woman - and onto the reaction of the Koreans (and ultimately Korean culture and attitudes) who are outraged by the video.

The next paragraph assures us that this is the right way to go.......

Western expats have been in Seoul for years. As in other Asian cities, these expat communities can have their bad apples, typically young men who misbehave, either because it’s in their nature, because they think they can get away with things in Asia that would never be tolerated at home, or both. I sent the video to several Westerners who have spent time in Korea among other expats; they all said that while this is an extreme and highly unusual case, it’s not so uncommon in Seoul to see young Western men drinking heavily and shouting after local women.

There you have it. The excessively abusive ex-pats are an unusual case - according to other ex-pats, so it must be true - which is convenient, because now the article can move move full-force into whitewashing the incident and complete the shifting of focus onto the sexist pathologies of Korean culture. Let's not even bother to explore the dynamic of race and sex that is evident in the video.

The stories about hard-partying disrespectful young Westerners surely don’t represent all expats in South Korea, but they do represent the fears of a foreign invasion. Keep in mind that the United States stations tens of thousands of troops on Korean soil .....The sense of national victimhood is real, even if the threat posed by 20-something English teachers from California or Australia is exaggerated...

Forget the sadistic ex-pats, the real problem is Korean xenophobia, driven by a sense of national victimhood - whatever underlying Western attitudes and cultural influences that promote "disrespectful" behaviour amongst ex-pats towards Asian people just isn't going to  be discussed.

The whitewash continues....

In 2012, the Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation, a South Korean state broadcaster somewhat akin to PBS or the BBC,released an expose-style report documenting the “shocking reality about relationships with foreigners.” Embedded below, it portrays Korean women as the victims of Western men who exploit their good-natured innocence, sleeping with them, disrespecting their culture, stealing from them and, in two cases the video makes much of, leaving them pregnant or with HIV. The subtext is loud and clear: Western men are a threat to our women.

The real underlying issue - again ignoring the very real sexist and racist behaviour of the ex-pats - is that Koreans are just plain racist! That is why they are so outraged - not because of any genuine sense of (justified) outrage at the specific incident in question.

More subtly, and not intentionally, it also shows the degree to which those Koreans see their country’s women in much the same way as do the misbehaving Western expats. Notice that they don’t have any agency in the report’s telling. At best, they’re too innocent to make responsible choices; at worst, too irresponsible to understand that they should avoid Western men.

The outrage is hypocritical because the Koreans are sexist too! Another excuse to avoid exploring in greater depth the sexist and racist behaviour of the ex-pats in the video - but not really true. If you take a few minutes to actually watch the video that the above comment refers to - it is embedded in the WaPo article - you will notice that aside from the obvious sensationalism, it does, in fact, reveal some behaviours amongst Korean women that we - even in the enlightened west - would find troublesome.

For example, one Korean woman allows herself to be picked up by a random white dude in the space of a few seconds as she waits for a cab, which is extremely irresponsible (for safety reasons alone) to say the least and a very poor choice. If a white woman were to do this in America, she would be called a slut and shamed on Facebook.

But the real problem with this point is that relationships between the races do have unique obstacles. If you add cultural differences, language issues, as well as gender issues, then being as casual as some of the Korean women in the video seem to be, can almost definitely be described as irresponsible, and even bordering on damagingly innocent. It has long been considered detrimental to any hopes of longevity in a relationship, if the relationship begins with a one-night stand, if you throw in the unique issues that often arise out inter-racial and inter-cultural relationships, then starting these relationships with casual sex is definitely a lousy idea if you are a Korean woman.

Innocence is a key word here. Let's remember that "pick-up" culture and the culture of casual sex are Western - and mostly American - cultural innovations, and it is interesting to note that this culture has often been taken overseas by the GI. Having lived in both the UK and Germany, I can say with some degree of certainty that the culture of casual sex has in the past met with some degree of hostility from the local population - that is, until the local dudes got into the game. Of course, the difference is that there was no equivalent American cultural phenomenon of racism towards the men of these countries that exists towards Koreans and other Asian men - so a culture exists that seeks to specifically exclude Asian men from the game.

But the point is, that the translation of culture from one society to another often loses some nuance. For women in America, casual sex reflects decades of feminist advocacy whereby women assert absolute control over their own bodies such that the choices that they make about  their bodies are not beholden to social restrictions or the sensibilities of men. It may be the case that this is what the culture of casual sex with western ex-pats represents for Korean women, but given that there doesn't seem to be an equally robust culture of woman driven female empowerment in areas outside of casual sex with westerners, it might be safe to assume that such a culture doesn't exist, and some Korean women may well have missed out on the nuance of female empowerment in relation to casual sex.

So, yes, there is good reason to be concerned that the behaviours exhibited by Korean women in the video are detrimental and irresponsible and good reason to wonder if they have an easily taken advantage of innocence about the casual-sex culture that some have bought into.

And finally.....

South Korea has the widest gender gap in the developed world, according to an annual study by the World Economic Forum, which found that women have less equality in South Korea than they do in India, Burkina Faso or the United Arab Emirates.........Some Korean women, frustrated by their country’s restrictive gender culture, can see Western men as a gateway to a world where they’re treated more equally.

There you have it. Yes, the Korean woman was getting abused by ex-pats, but the real issue here is the racist and sexist Korean culture which creates the environment that drives Korean women to pursue Western men regardless of how abusive they are.

The real issue is the ease with which the the WaPo article dismisses the idea of "disrespectful" Western ex-pats as uncommon - thanks to the testimony of other ex-pats! Of course, shouting at Korean women is more usual, but somehow not disrespectful. What is missing here is any awareness that western culture has assumed a default position of disrespect towards Asians and their cultures. Disrespect - at the best of times - defines the manner of the representation of Asian people in American (and other western ) culture. This is a fact as plain as the nose on your face.

As I've stated many times previously, American kids are brought up acting as though mocking Asian racial characteristics and ways of speech are normal - all against a background of cultural depictions that suggests an appropriateness to casual violence against Asians. This hints at a pretty strong indication of how normalized and ingrained is the culture of disrespect for Asians. Disrespect towards Asian people and cultures is as ingrained into American culture as deeply as love of the flag, as the commonality of childhood expressions of anti-Asian prejudice reveals.

That may help to explain the WaPo's article's inability to maintain a train of reasoning that faults western people who abuse Asians. My guess is that there is such strong conditioning in America to deflect issues of anti-Asian prejudice back onto Asians themselves that the article could be a sophisticated gut reaction. Or it could be that the awareness is just not there, and most likely a combination of both.  Even the fact that violence against women occurs at a higher incidence in America than it does in Korea - a fact that could help to explain the behaviour of these ex-pats - goes unexplored.

Most disappointingly, for me, is that the 8Asians post doesn't raise these questions either - it seems obvious to me, at least, as someone who has experienced the pervasive culture of disrespect towards Asians, that a video showing Westerners harassing a Korean woman in a manner that has racial undertones, that the actions of the ex-pats in the video warrants some exploration in the context of western attitudes towards Asians? Perhaps it is just easier - even for Asians - to avoid criticism of anti-Asian attitudes and deflect criticism back on our own cultures.

Social Capital

Asian-American Cultural Poverty.

I think that few people are surprised by the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the trial over his shooting of Trayvon Martin. Although the story is probably well-known, I'll summarize it briefly. Zimmerman, who was part of a neighbourhood watch group, observed Martin walking through his neighbourhood and presumed that he was up to no good. In his own words, Zimmerman describes how he thought that Martin looked suspicious, and seemed like he was on "drugs or something". Having alerted the police, Zimmerman was told by them to not approach the "suspect", advice he ignored. Armed, he approached Martin, who apparently (and reasonably), according to reports, felt threatened by Zimmerman's approach. What happened next will never be truly known, but what is accepted is that a fight ensued, that was ended when Zimmerman shot Martin dead.

What has interested me is the way that race politics has played out during the case and in its aftermath. Initially, it seemed like an open and shut case of white on black violence until it was realized that Zimmerman is - according to commonly held standards of description - Hispanic. Yet, it has seemed to me that this nuance has been downplayed, seemingly by both the black and Hispanic communities and their leaders. Granted, I live on a different continent, so I may have missed some nuanced reporting, but it has definitely seemed to me that the mainstream and community leaders have downplayed Zimmerman's "Hispanic-ness".

This may be in keeping with the general tendency to downplay what some believe to be rapidly deteriorating black/Hispanic relations. But, it also highlights the way that the influence of America's various ethnicities is beginning to emerge.

As I wrote about here, there are some who believe that new racial demarcation lines are being drawn, that elevate Asians and Hispanics to a social level closer to America's whites, but leaving blacks rooted firmly at the bottom of the social hierarchy. I pointed out how simplistic that idea was - particularly regarding the Asian community, where there is a distinct disparity in cultural, social, and perhaps even political integration between the genders. Furthermore, one of the main factors used by that study to suggest a blurring of lines between whites and Asians was high outmarriage rates of Asian women, which I discount as a reasonable thesis based on the contradictory evidence of culturally normalized anti-Asian racism, disparate experiences based on gender (which the study did acknowledge), and pervasive racist attitudes and behaviours exhibited towards Asians by non-Asian children. The point here, is that a more holistic approach might paint a more accurate picture of how attitudes towards race might, or might not, be changing.

For example, it could be argued that blacks are almost fully integrated and accepted as participants in the political arena, and as cultural leaders. Anti-black racism - although rampant - is largely accepted as a moral infringement that is detrimental to society. Asians by contrast are largely culturally invisible, and have only recently begun to emerge as viable political leaders in any numbers. Furthermore, anti-Asian racism is normalized, and Americans conditioned to accept anti-Asian racism as normal, by America's culture, such that it considered appropriate to mock Asian victims of a plane crash - some of whom died in the incident. Clearly, if race lines are being re-drawn, then there it is more sensible to take into account several factors beyond high out-marriage rates, and perhaps even income levels.

Hispanics are an interesting case. My personal observation is that Hispanics are more readily accepted by white America than either blacks or Asians. In fact, my sense is that Hispanics are more readily accepted by Asians and blacks than Asians and blacks accept each other. This may sound like a strange thing to say but, again, if we look at culture, it seems as though there is more room for maneuver for Hispanics. To begin, I cannot imagine large swathes of white Americans supporting legislation that offers amnesty to eleven million undocumented Asian immigrants. Given that white parents can't stand the thought of their kids being around sizeable numbers of Americans of Asian descent in America's schools, it is reasonable to accept that Asians would not be welcomed in the numbers that Hispanics have been relatively accepted.

Of course, the cultural clues support this idea of white America's relative comfort with Hispanic people and "Latin" cultures. Hispanics have a strong political presence and, culturally, there are myriad numbers of Hispanic cultural figures - Hispanic males can and do take leading roles in film and television, in ways that blacks can do in limited ways, and Asians are excluded from doing. For example, Hispanic male leads are regularly cast as the love interest of white women, but black men are not, even though there have been several black male actors with huge box-office appeal - I'm reminded of the movie "Hancock", in which the superhero Will Smith, was portrayed as the soul-mate of Charlize Theron, but the nerdy white guy still ended up with her.

But what is the point here, and what does it have to do with the Zimmerman case? Well, first of all, the way that the black/Hispanic dynamic has been downplayed shows a political will, on both sides perhaps, to de-escalate conflict. Compare, for example, how in black/Asian relations, Asian racism is highlighted, and often exaggerated by both community leaders and the media. This is where the level of cultural inclusion speaks volumes about social status. Both Hispanics and blacks have an influential political, social, and cultural, voice, and, thus, any accusations leveled at their groups can be swiftly and effectively responded to by a number of voices from a number of outlets. Asians, by contrast, have no such luxury - because Asians are marginalized in culture, our "voice" is effectively whatever anyone wants our voice to be. Naturally, because anti-Asian prejudice is normalized, much of the defining of who and what Asian-Americans are about, emerges as the natural outcome of this hostile culture and is, thus, uncompromising, confrontational, and is absent suggestions of conciliation.

And this, to me, characterizes how America interacts with its Asian minority - uncompromising and confrontational, but with the understanding that reconciliation isn't necessary because reconciliation implies inclusion. Because Asians have little social and political capital - so to speak - there is no obligation to de-escalate tensions between Asians and other groups. That is why, for instance, the pogrom against Koreans during the LA riots were justified based almost solely on accusations of racism against the Koreans (even by Asians themselves), and both community leaders and the media stoked the flames of America's racial antagonism towards Asians, but there is no equivalent stoking - by any group - of Hispanic/black tensions in the aftermath of the Zimmerman acquittal. I don't think we will be seeing many people attempting to pillage and burn Hispanic enclaves in America's cities - and if it does happen, Hispanics won't be castigated for defending themselves as the Koreans were castigated for defending themselves.

I suppose one could see this equilibrium as a positive sign, yet, I cannot help but be disappointed to once again realize that moral obligation isn't always the fundamental driving force in the interaction between peoples. What drives it, is the careful balance between any given  group's ability to hurt or help you. It is a testament to poor social status of the Asian minority that conciliatory positions seem to be rarely promoted when conflict arises with other groups. Instead, we see an attitude of brow-beating and score-settling, which is easy to do because Asians have little or no control over how their community represented in culture.

Of course, none of this changes the fact that a black child was profiled, followed, and ultimately shot, by a gung-ho, wannabe hero, who in my view, provoked an incident that should have been avoided. To me, that makes Zimmerman as guilty as any of the hundreds of offenders who have been convicted of manslaughter after causing death while driving drunk.

Another Update

I just wanted to update on what is going on and why I haven't posted anything substantial for a couple of months. Disruptions caused by the protests have made both concentration and desire for writing to dissipate. I have started several posts but because circumstances have affected concentration I have been slow to finish them. Now that the situation has calmed down, I hope to get back into the rhythm of posting again!

At the same time, there is another reason for my lack of posting that is less dramatic than a popular uprising. I have started work on a novel that I hope to have finished by the end of the year, and much of my writing energy has been taken up by it. I don't want to give too much away, but I will say that it is a novel based on the experiences of the early Asian immigrants to the US. It is something of a historical narrative framed and told through fictional characters. So far, I have completed the first six chapters and I am hoping to self-publish the work before 2014. Inşallah!

What's Going On!

Events here in Turkey seem to have gone from bad to worse. On weekdays, each morning starts calmly, but towards late afternoon tension slowly builds in the Taksim area and things come to a standstill. I have been a little too distracted by events and tear gas to post anything, but hope to resume normal posting within the next few days. Inşallah!

By the way June 11th was the third anniversary of my blog! And it passed without me realizing it. The time seems have just flown by, and it is strange that many of my posts from the early days are still fresh in my mind. Happy Birthday Ben Ef!

Hope to resume normal posting soon! 

Pink?

Observations.

I just read this on Angry Asian Man, the 18th Annual Asian-American Showcase is in progress, held every year by the Chicago based organization, the Foundation for Asian American Independent Media (FAAIM) in which - as the name suggests - they showcase the product of Asian-American cultural endeavour. 

Naturally, this is something that I applaud. If you check out their "About Us" page, they have set themselves an extremely important mission, so kudos to them!

I do have to say though - and this is in no way a rant, or a criticism - that the logo that they have chosen for the Showcase is extremely interesting......



As you can see above, the logo shows a pink background with various shades of polka dots, and a white cat super-imposed over the top. As readers may remember, a common thesis of mine that recurs throughout this blog, concerns itself with the feminization of the Asian-American voice. To me, the logo looks feminine. 

It doesn't detract from the hugely important work that the organization appears to be doing, or in any way demean their efforts, but it is feminine. Of course, there is nothing wrong with that, but I wonder if this feminization process is so complete that we don't think twice when an event that seems in no way geared specifically to women, has a logo that is decidedly feminine.

My sense is that the feminine voice has become the voice of Asian-America because it is basically unthreatening and passive, and it is difficult to find anything more feminine and unthreatening than a white pussycat on a pink and white polka-dot background.

Asian Parenting.....

....Is It Wicked?

In the wake of  Mother's Day, I thought it would be appropriate to write in praise of Asian parents since most of the time Asian parents are written about as though they are monsters (just like asians in general). It should come as little surprise that even on the subject of Asian parents, mainstream America has its own set of ideas and beliefs that seem to emerge from the peristalsis fed by a diet of ignorance, misinformation, and sometimes even, bad will.

There's little doubt that ideas about Asian parents are a subset of stereotypes about Asian people in general. Of course, it doesn't help that some Asians themselves bottom-feed opportunistically off of the phenomenon, scoring brownie points, perhaps, amongst the mainstream intelligentsia for throwing off the illusory shackles of oppressive Asian cultures. The mainstream, in turn, is grateful that its widely held racial stereotypes are seemingly justifiably absolved of charges of racism because how can a stereotype be racist when it is true?!

Ideas about Asian parents seem to be based on the notion that they are emotionally distant, cold, and extremely harsh. An unhelpful tendency amongst some Asian-Americans (cynical and deliberate or not) to racialize personal choices must contribute to normalizing such stereotypes. For example, Amy Chua's uneducated guesstimation that asserted her personal preference of harsh dragon-lady type mothering as typical of Asian cultures has subsequently been shown to be a puff of magical dragon smoke in light of actual studies showing that claims that her methods are representative of Asian mothers to be false. According to that study, Asian parents are generally more loving and sensitive to the specific needs of their children than any stereotype of an emotionally remote Sheol of Asian humanity would want us to believe.

The ramifications are disturbing for those who thrive off of propagating stereotypes about pervasive Asian emotional handicaps. If Asian parents as a group, generally turn out to be as supportive and emotionally warm with their kids as the white-parenting Gold Standard, then where does that leave all of those commentators who assert that harsh Asian parenting is responsible for the dearth of Asians in positions of authority in industry, or the lack of iconic Asian-American cultural figures, or any other dearth of Asians where it might be expected? As the study suggested, harsh parenting does produce emotionally and socially stunted offspring, but Asian parents apparently aren't particularly harsh as a general rule, so, of course, that puts the ball right back into the court of mainstream attitudes as, perhaps, a significant factor for this state of affairs.

On the subject of cultural "icons", it is probably not entirely accurate to say that we don't have any of Asian descent, but who are the Asians that we can say are iconic in the sense that they are greatly admired or emulated, the appreciation of whom transcends racial and cultural boundaries? Several come to mind off the top of my head; PSY, Manny Pacquiao, and Bruce Lee, to name but three, but few (if any) Americans of Asian descent meet the criteria to be labeled "culturally iconic". It could be persuasively argued that the fact that there are (albeit limited) cultural icons of Asian descent strongly indicates that mainstream prejudices are insignificant.

But my sense is that since Asians growing up in the US, are likely be exposed to racially inflected negative and hostile attitudes and behaviours starting the moment they step foot into the first-grade classroom (or turn on the television) - behaviours that are culturally normalized in politics and the media - there may be pressures not accounted for in this narrative that discourages outspokenness and social confidence. It could be that mainstream America simply doesn't want American icons with Asian faces because they cannot accept that Americans can or should have Asian faces. In any case, it seems to be becoming increasingly unreasonable to blame Asian parenting for Asians not making to the "top" in the numbers one would expect for such a highly educated group.

I think that amongst Asian-Americans there is something of a "grass is greener" syndrome at work when comparing their upbringings with that of their white peers - it is not uncommon to hear Asians assert that white kids are more "well-rounded" and "happier. This may be especially acute for those who may find social integration or interaction to be a challenge - for example, those Asian men who fault the way that their parents raised them as the cause of their lack of success with women. The narrative goes like this; Asian parents are harsh and don't let their kids socialize (the way that white parents do) and so Asians don't get the opportunities to learn how to socialize appropriately, or in the case of Asian men don't learn how to "get good with the chicks". Well, this doesn't appear to be true. As the study shows, Asian parents are usually quite happy to let their kids socialize, so if Asian men are experiencing social awkwardness it has to be a more holistic issue and not just the result of Asian parents teaching awkwardness. It should be said, that Asian kids might also be "happier" and "well-rounded" if they didn't have to deal with pervasive and culturally normalized anti-Asian racism in the school environment.

I do have to say at this point that I laugh at the suggestion that white parents somehow "teach" their kids how to socialize with others their age (or that white kids are "well-rounded"), simply because if you are a thirty-five-plus parent and you know how to interact with early-pubescent kids, then you are probably extremely creepy. It's called the generation gap, and it is a very real phenomenon; once past a certain age, it becomes increasingly difficult to understand how younger generations interact, and you find that you have less and less in common, and less and less to talk about with younger people. This means that almost all parents have little to offer when it comes to the all-important details of socialization amongst their offspring, because that is the nature of human socialization; older generations find it increasingly difficult to relate to younger generations. Certainly, there are core values that parents should teach, and basic manners, but parents have absolutely no way to know how successive generations are interacting with each other, and there is no reason to believe that Asian parents don't teach these core values to their kıds.When it comes to teaching how to "interact with girls" I find it hard to believe that white parents take their sons out and show them how pick up chicks!

No, people learn socialization skills (including interaction with the opposite sex) basically on their own amongst a group of similarly aged and minded people. And this is where the problems arise because in truth,  it is not the Asians who are awkward but America that is awkward with us. Look at it this way; American culture normalizes behaviour towards Asians that is demeaning and dehumanizing. Some of the ways this manifests are through mockery of our racial characteristics (e.g. the "chink-eye"), mockery of "Asian" languages (e.g. "ching-chong"), propagation of stereotypes that promote harassment of Asians, and a culture of normalization of images of sadistic violence towards Asians. So think about how difficult it is to learn culturally appropriate socialization when the culture that you belong to promotes casual racist behaviour towards you.

We know that this is pervasive and normalized because it happens in every strata of American society and across generations - from children in the playground targeting Asian kids with racial slurs and racial mockery, to beloved mainstream celebs doing the same thing on television or in the media, and from common movie images of justified violence against some Asian foe, to justifications of violence against Asian shopkeepers in America's ghettos. Wherever one looks, one can see that mainstream American culture models behaviour that makes it normal to target Asians with demeaning behaviour at best or harassment and violence at worst.

But Asians want to believe that it is we who have the problem of social awkwardness when, in fact, America has a problem of malign social awkwardness with us (just think back to how awkward America was with Jeremy Lin last year and how second-nature and normal it was to post comment about him in racialized stereotyped ways). So, if Asians are somehow finding it difficult to integrate socially, yes, perhaps some of our parents could do with some updates on how to better socialize their kids, but the elephant in the room here is that American culture itself is a major culprit in normalizing behaviour towards Asians that would be considered unsociable and appalling if enacted with any other non-Asian individual or group.

Given that so much of the life experiences of Asian-Americans are determined by skewed mainstream cultural norms, it seems unfair to expect Asian parents to know how deal with this. It would be nice to think that we could turn to our mothers and fathers and they would have a solution to this problem, but that is unrealistic - after all, how would they know how to fix that problem. The truth is that no matter how well-rounded Asian parents raise their children to be, they will always come up against this normalization of racial awkwardness towards them fostered by American culture.

In no way does this discount the experiences of those who have indeed suffered from extremely harsh or abusive parenting - Asians are as prone to this as any group, no more, no less - but even for these people my sense is that it is better to clarify that it is likely that they would come up against mainstream attitudes and behaviours that promote social difficulties for Asians, even if their parents had not been harsh. Having supportive parents doesn't make these problems go away, and there is little reason to believe that having a well-rounded upbringing will make you better able to deal with the casual prejudices that Asians are almost certain to encounter.

Word To Your Mother.

Asians And Hip-Hop Machismo.

I came across this article written back in 2005 by African-American activist/writer, Kenyon Farrow, in which he explores the (to him and others, probably) irritating appropriation of rap music and culture by wannabe Asians.

I won't go into great depth about Farrow's charge of appropriation of culture simply because most culture is appropriated in some way or another (and is not an implicitly bad thing), often with the result that those who have appropriated a style, art form, or belief system, have taken it to new heights it may not have reached otherwise. For example, the "hand-gun machismo" present in hip-hop culture wouldn't be possible without the anonymous Chinese alchemists whose culture produced both the gunpowder and the first guns. What we would be left with, instead, is the more absurd notion of "popping arrows", or "slingshot" in opponents' asses instead of "caps".

Facetiousness aside, short of authoritarian legislation enforcing strict cultural segregation of those deemed unworthy to participate in a particular form, the idea of "illegal" or "unfair" cultural appropriation is too vague, and simply, silly, to foster any meaningful discussion. Unless you are stealing specific works or limiting opportunities, then trying to limit the transaction of cultural ideas or structures is little more than petty posturing.

But what most interested me about the article, is the idea that young Asian men are looking to the hyper-masculinity of black hip-hop as a potential model for their own burgeoning masculine identities. This would make sense; a group that is culturally emasculated would logically be attracted to the most opposite extreme of the hyper-masculinity of hip-hop. Yet, strange as it may sound, despite what may seem to be obvious displays of masculine power, I think that "hip-hop masculinity" is actually nothing of the sort, and, in fact, is too limited in scope to offer Asian boys (and perhaps any boy) a meaningful masculine identity that can foster their maturity into manhood.

Ostensibly, this sounds odd - ghetto-spawned hip-hop evolved out of a culture of want, discrimination, toughness, and rebellion, producing men who were confrontational, aggressive, sexualized, tough, and uncompromising. These men would rip your head off if you so much as looked at them the wrong way. And if we look at the present-day ghettos of the US, we might see that this type of masculinity seems dominant; confrontational, aggressive, and uncompromising. Of course, hip-hop - especially in the popular perception of it - reflects these characteristics.

Yet, my sense is that what is portrayed or perceived as hyper-masculine is not really as masculine as we think. In the course of my internet travels I happened across an article called "Myth Of The Ghetto Alpha Male" I believe written by a black blogger. The gist of the post is that ghetto hyper-masculinity is largely over-rated. The reasoning is that due to the circumstances of the ghetto, young African-American males are largely raised in environments controlled by women because most of the older men are either dead or imprisoned. Men - importantly older men - are largely absent in the fostering of young black male identities, leaving young African-American boys to scavenge their masculinity from their innate testosterone, and a masculinity learned from women. He describes the consequences thus.......

Supermacho, obnoxious, fearless to the point of knuckleheaded, overaggressive…basically the parody of manhood we see in gangster rap. It’s overcompensation to the worst degree.....But even though they are doing their best to be superthug, they still end up doing things in a subtly feminine (not effeminate) way because feminine influences are most of what they know....

.....Most of their role models and involved family members are women, and the few men in their lives were likely raised by only women too. And it shows in how they handle conflict: grudges are held forever, they never know how to let anything slide, they think primarily with emotion and are prone to outbursts, drama and confrontation and most importantly, they don’t know how to choose their battles. True male behavior isn’t being a drama queen, emotional outbursts and holding onto grudges...

A chick in the hood can get away with all the drama queen meltdowns and public displays of emotion and confrontation....When guys are the ones getting overly emotional and confrontational, it’s a lot scarier and it invites a much more serious retaliation, because now the behavior’s coming from a man, which means possible escalation into serious, possibly fatal, violence.

Although I agree that lacking older male role models and guides wreaks havoc with masculinity, I don't necessarily agree that what the author has described above can truly be said to be feminine. Yes, the emotionalism is feminine, but whereas what is being described above is emotionally confrontational, women tend not to use their emotional skills in that way. I think it is more accurate to say that this kind of behaviour is juvenile, or even childish, and childlike, as opposed to feminine. Boys who who come into manhood without the input of older, wiser, mature, men, remain childish adults.

Children and juveniles are impulsive, sometimes unreasonably aggressive, overly emotional, seldom utilize rational thinking to choose reasonable actions, poor at compromise, argumentative, and are poor at managing their emotions. This corresponds more closely with the type of behaviour described in the quoted piece, as well as more closely resembles the kind of affect and attitude present in much popular hip-hop; ostensibly masculine posturing, but if we were to be honest we would admit that it is actually juvenile (and to be fair, I tend to see all popular culture as juvenile in some ways). It would seem obvious then, that hip-hop's childishly aggressive posturing parading as pseudo-masculinity is a poor basis upon which to build a genuine masculine identity for Asian boys and probably even for young black boys. You cannot learn masculinity from juveniles.

Strangely enough, Asian-Americans also have a similar process of femininizing and infantilizing how Asian men interact with mainstream America. Because it is the voices of Asian females that have reached the mainstream consciousness, Asian men have adopted the feminine manner of commentary. As I have pointed out in several previous posts, our tendency to continually frame our commentary of race issues through the framework of our passive emotional responses - notably by being "offended" - illustrates just how profoundly we have adopted the passive and unthreatening feminine voice as the voice of our masculinity. It may be that the hyper-aggression of hip-hop is speaking to an aspect of Asian youths' innate masculinity that our own Asian-American culture may not cater to.

So, although I can see why hip-hop's charismatic pseudo-masculinity would appeal to young Asian boys who notice their cultural invisibility in mainstream America, it seems to be little more than the immature parody of true manhood. This is not to say that Asian-American boys should reject hip-hop as a means to explore their cultural voice - culture can sometimes be utilized as a tool for self-exploration. Plus, despite the prickly negativity of Farrow's article, Asians exploring the culture of African-Americans - particularly in light of black/Asian racial tensions - can only lead to good things. Farrow has this to say.......

....how does the presence of Asian Americans in hip-hop, this black cultural artform, look any different than that of white folks in Jazz, Blues, and Rock & Roll?

By referring to the historical exploitative appropriation of black culture by white people Farrow paints an  understandably bleak, yet, incomplete picture of the phenomenon. Yes, white people stole black artists' songs, styles, and adopted their culture, but it was also a small minority of whites who brought black music to the public consciousness in genuine ways that could be said to have led to the explosion of mainstream black artists into the mainstream charts in the 1960's. It was white British musicians of the late 1950's and early 1960's  who were fans of obscure black blues and R&B musicians that brought these styles and their black originators to the public attention and which might be said to have contributed to the softening of attitudes such that it fostered opportunities for black artists where they didn't exist previously.

So as uncomfortable as it might be to admit, the white "presence" in black culture has been both mostly extremely negative but also positive - and who can say whether, overall, the white presence won't turn out to have been resulted in something that was ultimately positive? I see no reason to see why the Asian "presence" in black culture would not or should not be a positive thing - just don't take the hyper-masculinity too seriously!

We're All Model Minorities.....

....When We Achieve Success.

In a previous post I outlined some issues surrounding the way that some people in the Asian community view the model-minority stereotype and how it seems self-defeating to focus on the specific label instead of the underlying culture that produces it. By focusing on the resentment apparently stirred amongst other minorities,  and making it our responsibility to soothe this resentments, we are denying ourselves the opportunity to bring the issue of our profound cultural marginalization to the table. This means that we are failing to address the fundamental issue that causes the problem in the first place; the culture of casual anti-Asian racism that has marginalized the Asian voice to such a degree that it can create - on a whim - an entire false identity for a group of people and make it the definitive mode through which that group is conceived, even though it is false on so many levels. That is the true issue, not the petty resentments created by it.

In the study that I referred to in that previous post, the interviewees voiced their frustrations with Asian-Americans that they claimed have "internalized" the model-minority stereotype and supposedly exchanged a political and social consciousness for economic acceptance. As one interviewee put it.....

One person, an academic, said that the model minority myth bound those who accepted it to certain “tacit agreements” in exchange for privileged racial status. “You don’t have the same kind of churning and dislocation necessarily with middle-class Asians and middle-class whites. .......provided that they behave themselves… [which] might mean not getting too involved in the political process, accepting the role of the junior partner.”

Given my general skepticism about the interviewees' generalizations, it may surprise readers that I actually think that there is some merit to this point - to be successful and gain acceptance into mainstream culture, many Asians do abdicate their political and social consciousness. What is problematic about the antagonism that we mete out towards such Asian - as well as the implicit invitation for other groups to join us in this - is that this phenomenon is not unique or specific to Asians. There is an implicit suggestion that this is an Asian problem that impedes the progress of fellow peoples of colour and both explains and, perhaps, justifies some of the resentments  directed at us by these other minorities.

This, of course, is nonsense for a couple of reasons. Any resentment caused by any racial stereotype is racist, plain and simple. It is makes no difference that those expressing the resentment are black, Latino, or white, if you judge an entire group of people because of a made-up stereotype, then that is racist. The second, and more significant problem with this way of thinking is that abandoning political and social consciousness once economic or social acceptance is attained is something that all minorities do. For example, few black celebrities will speak out about police harassment and brutality in the community or high incarceration rates of black men, or the appalling indifference to the quality of education in urban schools affecting black children. As Harry Belafonte put it.....

From the highest pinnacles of Wall Street to the kings and queens of entertainment, to the gods and goddesses of sports, never before at these levels have we boasted such large numbers of Black participants. All this at the same time Black America is condemned to be the harvest of the largest prison population on the face of the earth, the most destroyed by the diseases of poverty, the most undereducated, the most diminished for lack of self-worth and the most punished by the prejudices of an unworthy justice system. The list goes on...

Clearly, any suggestion that  Asian-American are alone in abdicating political or social consciousness is untrue and as damaging a stereotype as any - the difference is that it is an idea that is put forward by Asians themselves.

Of course, the real issue - which we fail to address in our rush to soothe unfair resentment directed at us - is that it has to be the unspoken rule that in order for minorities, of any colour, to be acceptable into the white mainstream, they must not bite the hand that feeds them. In other words, most ethnic minorities who succeed in the mainstream have to - and do - abide by this unspoken rule, meaning that such all such people are effectively assuming a "model-minority" identity. That is, they get to take a share of the prosperity, and in return they avoid inconvenient political and social commentary.

This may be why few black sportsmen and entertainers seem to mention high incarceration rates of black males, police brutality and harassment, and the poor quality of education that seems characteristic of mainly poor, black, neighbourhoods - to do so in a meaningful way would break the rules. Sportsmen might lose popularity and maybe endorsements, entertainers might notice their record sales sliding, or face a backlash in the press.

The point here is that many Asians seem to have internalized (funnily enough) this aspect of the model-minority stereotype in this unique way; the implication is that acting like a model-minority by avoiding "controversial" politics and social commentary in exchange for a place at the table of success is specific, or even limited to the Asian minority. Of course, the problem here is that there is little evidence for this - in fact, all the evidence suggests that most successful minority individuals will assume this role and avoid activism against the poor treatment of minorities in America.

It should go without saying that any attempt to foster alignment between Asians and other minorities is fatally flawed if we base some of our presumptions about our own community on an idea that is simply untrue. The reality is not that the Asians-as-model-minority label contributes to maintaining the status quo of racial oppression, but that all minorities who achieve success are required to assume a "model-minority identity" to some degree - even, apparently, African-Americans. This is a significantly different proposition that makes all of our shame and embarrassment about being the "elevated" minority somewhat misplaced. In fact, it could be even worse that no-one recognizes this acquiescence to the status quo from successful figures in the black community - not noticing this phenomenon means that we don't realize there is a problem which only enables the problem to continue.

The key thing to understand here is that if these model-minority identities do, in fact, contribute to maintaining the status quo of racial oppression, then any minority individual who achieves success but fails to advocate for justice is guilty of this - and as I have demonstrated it is not just Asians (as individuals or as a group) who do this. Taking on this burden that is based on a false premise only enables anti-Asian racism to persist, not only in the mainstream, but also amongst the other minorities with whom we seek to align.

And that is the biggest issue with our unfathomable unchallenged acceptance of model-minority identities as something unique to the Asian community. Yes, we are labeled as such - again mostly, apparently by ourselves these days - but the reality is that for any minority to succeed means a de facto acceptance, to some degree, of this model-minority identity. Paradoxically, by taking on this burden as a specific problem that Asians alone should address, we are actually allowing the the status quo to continue because such an acceptance implicitly denies that this phenomenon exists beyond Asian-America, when very clearly it does. If minority success brings with it a responsibility to advocate for racial justice, then by denying that this problem exists as a structural issue by which all minorities must abide, is to absolve any non-Asian minority from the responsibility of actually engaging in advocacy - which must perpetuate racial injustice.

What Asian-Americans are effectively doing when they approach inter-minority relations and model-minority labeling from this position, is to get in the way of genuine dialogue on the role that all minorities play in maintaining racial injustices in return for prosperity or success. By allowing ourselves to be viewed as the sole bearers of this identity, we are side-tracking the dialogue away from a more realistic understanding of the complexities of race politics. In the process, we are also allowing what amounts to, often racist, resentment from other minorities to fester without challenging the fundamental premises from which this resentment derives.

We Don't Know Much!

Asian Attitudes And The Model Minority.

The folks over at the "Racefiles" blog have posted the findings of a study that they conducted that sought to..

...better understand the racial position of Asian Americans, and how Asian American identity functions in the realm of racial politics...

To accomplish this, they did the following.....

....conducted in-depth, confidential interviews with 82 Asian American organizers, leaders, intellectuals, and artists working in the racial justice field throughout the United States. We also talked to five non-Asian American racial justice leaders doing promising work that cuts across all communities of color. 

There is some good background information provided that offers a persuasive (but, in my opinion, incomplete) interpretation  of the historical background that has shaped the social hierarchy of 21st century America.

The latter part of the findings shifts focus somewhat to the interviewees' personal visions for mobilizing Asian-Americans. But, I'll begin by focusing on the report's findings on the racial attitudes and positions of Asian-Americans as represented by the interviewees.

In answer to the question of "how Asian Americans think about race, and whether we should work to build a more unified Asian American identity", the following was concluded......

They Don’t. It is significant that about one-third of respondents said that Asian Americans do not think about race at all. Some said this was because of the weakness of Asian American racial identity especially among first-generation immigrants and refugees, but others attributed it to the racial position of Asian Americans, especially those with class privilege, which encouraged the embrace of American individualism.

Asian American Racial Superiority. Many participants critiqued the model minority myth as a strategy to denigrate Blackness and distance Asian Americans from other peoples of color, in service to white supremacy.

 And one Mid-West organizer elaborates....

“I mean, Asians are racist… I don’t think that they think very highly of African Americans. I think that they largely think what they’re told about them, which is that they’re criminals, they’re undeserving, they try and feed off the system, they don’t work hard, they’re scary, all of those different kinds of things… It’s messed up.”

The next question asked; What do Asian Americans Think of Other Peoples of Color?

In general, there was a sense that Asian Americans had internalized negative stereotypes about Blacks and Latinos in particular, and took pride in the model minority myth, even if they did not think explicitly about race in their daily lives.......More than half of the people we interviewed said that Asian Americans exhibited a significant amount of anti-Black racism.

The piece goes on to describe Asian-American attitudes towards Latinos - generally slightly warmer than attitudes towards blacks, but still somewhat negative - and Asian-American feelings towards Native Americans, which turned out to be non-existent - Asian-Americans don't think about them much. But overall, the general consensus was that Asian/black tensions were the most significant manifestation of Asian-American feelings of racial superiority.

Although these findings are presented as representative of Asian-American attitudes, I was disturbed by the fact that nowhere were these conclusions supported by studies, surveys, or polls, conducted on the community. On the contrary, these findings were simply the opinions, perceptions, and guesswork of the interviewees. Now it may be the case that these interviewees were referring to studies but no studies were cited to support their statements.

The problem with this should be obvious. It is simply misleading to represent opinions about the attitudes and worldview of a group as the actual attitudes and feelings of that group. It doesn't matter that these people are activists or advocates, their opinions are just their opinions and nothing more. I don't doubt that the intentions of the study were noble, but without a legitimate study conducted directly with members of the community that reflect a representative cross-section of the demographic then the conclusions can only be misleading.

As I have written elsewhere, marginalization of Asian-Americans (and Asians) is often driven by misrepresentation by self-proclaimed experts - whose objectivity is never questioned and the subjectivity of their assertions never recognized - who often manufacture, skew, or over-generalize, information about Asia and present them as facts. This way of doing things is popular because the input of Asians is not required, and not even wanted, allowing any claims to be made (often resulting in best-selling books) without the inconvenient question of their veracity being raised. No-one wants Asians ruining the cultural Asian-marginalizing party by actually asking Asians to express and interpret their own ideas without the filter of a white expert's subjective opinion. Thus, Asians are often excluded from dialogue about themselves. The last thing that Asian-Americans need is to have our own advocates and intellectuals doing things in a similar vein.

Even if we were to accept the unlikely scenario that a handful of activists can know Asian-Americans well enough to make the kinds of sweeping statements that were made, the way it was reported is troubling. For example, in answer to the question "how Asian Americans think about race, and whether we should work to build a more unified Asian American identity", the study "found" that "Asians don't" think about it. The problem here is that even this is misleading - even if we do accept that the activists' opinions are an accurate representation of Asian-American attitudes. Only one-third of the interviewees believed that Asians don't think about race, this leaves at least two-thirds of interviewees who may believe that Asians do, in fact, think about race. So, even by their own criteria, it is inaccurate to say that Asians don't think about race - in fact, the opposite may well be the case and at least two-thirds do.

These criticisms are significant when we look at the latter part of the study which looks to answer the questions of the direction, character, and focus, of future Asian-American "resistance". The section begins as follows.....

Is It Strategic to Organize and Resist as Asian Americans?This question revealed deep conflicts and confusion, and it demands much more debate and discussion among racial justice organizers. There was a fairly even split between those who said “yes” we should work to build a unified API identity, and those who said “no,” “maybe,” or “I don’t know.” Among those who said that we should, one-third had significant qualifiers, sometimes contradicting their initial answer. Even those working at API organizations expressed doubts. One person said, “I don’t know if I would say yes to that. I mean, I’ve spent my 20 years doing so, but I don’t know.” Another person simply said, “I don’t even know what ‘API’ means.” 

It seems evident that Asian-American justice workers really don't have a clear-cut vision of what the goals of Asian-American advocacy are, what it would take to mobilize Asians politically, how we should co-operate with other peoples of colour, or even whether Asian-American identity is a good basis for organizing. Yet, nowhere is mention made of actually asking Asian-Americans themselves what their experiences are and how they see themselves in the racial dynamics of American society. And this is a serious omission from the thinking of our activists.

The reason is that what is actually missing is a body of work that tells us, with reasonable accuracy, what are the experiences of Asian-America that could inform their activism. What this means is that at this point in time, perhaps it would be more meaningful to focus on working on an ontology of Asian-America that allows us to move beyond the guesswork and opinion. Ontology can be defined as "a specification of a conceptualization", which means to establish a criterion for what does, or does not, exist. For Asian-America, this means removing the guesswork, over-generalized labeling, opinion, and supposition, from our dialogue, and establishing the fact from the fiction. This ontology could be informed by academic study, polls, or even journalistic investigation, but it has to exist in order for a meaningful vision to be established.

My final point of interest is in the stated feelings of the interviewees towards the model-minority stereotype. In the study, much time is spent on, and much reference is made to, the model-minority label and how it affects relations between Asian-Americans and other minorities. Many (perhaps all) interviewees decry the stereotype for "elevating" Asians above other minorities and causing division between them, implying that Asians don't do enough to "fight" the stereotype. But I think that this is simplistic and dangerous because it fundamentally asks that Asians answer for a stereotype that they didn't create and I don't think that it is fair, or appropriate. Even those successful Asians who supposedly "embrace" the stereotype are not obliged to answer for it.

Here is the irony; my observation is that it is mostly Asian-Americans who actually use the term "model-minority". In mainstream America, the term is hardly ever mentioned when referring to Asians. In fact, American culture is so poisoned with negative attitudes towards Asians that, culturally, we are far from being viewed as models for anything. Sure, there are the reports of Asian successes, but often these are presented with a tone of foreboding, and rarely as a celebration. White culture doesn't celebrate our successes - it is disturbed by them.

And this is where it gets uncomfortable because given that American culture demeans Asians (to the point of it becoming the cultural norm), any resentment has to derive from the apparent contradiction between these reported successes and the cultural attitude that Asians are society's losers. This goes beyond the simplistic notion of a "cause-effect" character of the model minority stereotype - it might be more likely that people resent Asians because pathetic Asian losers are not supposed to be successful.

This is problematic for those who wish to allay black resentment towards Asians caused by the stereotype by insisting that we show contrition for it, because the model-minority label doesn't really exist as the resentment-motivating entity that we seem to think it is. It is culturally normalized anti-Asian attitudes that make resentment and hostility the standard mode of interaction for mainstream America (of all colours) and its Asian minority regardless of any specific label - that is Americans are conditioned to view Asians with suspicion, hostility, and distrust, regardless of any particular stereotype.

This might be uncomfortable for some because it suggests that anti-Asian hostility from both black and white Americans derives from the same root cause of cultural conditioning and not from a specific stereotype that we have perceived to be uniquely designed for this purpose. That is why fighting the model-minority stereotype is like jousting windmills - the entire culture is set up to create a no-win and a no-way-in attitude towards Asians. People would find any excuse to resent us even if the model-minority stereotype didn't exist because the entire manner of America's cultural attitude with Asians promotes distrust and suspicion.

It is naive to react with horror (and surprise) that the white racism which produced the stereotype has induced a racist response from other minorities towards Asians. And it is self-deceiving to deny that  that is racist when people are resentful towards a group because of stereotypes, regardless of who is expressing it. It is almost always forgotten that the model-minority stereotype reflects how profoundly the Asian minority of America is culturally marginalized; an entire identity can be, and has been, created for us by media and cultural forces that excludes Asians from the whole process of its creation, yet which has been successful in defining what it means to be Asian-American in the popular consciousness. If other minorities hate us because of that, then that implies an uncompromising prejudice in a similar vein to that modeled by the white mainstream.

There are other, equally or more, pervasive representations of Asians that may have far worse consequences than the model-minority stereotype. American culture enacts and depicts racial harassment of Asian people as a normal and acceptable activity, and often engages in fantasies about committing sadistic violence towards, and mass-murder of, Asian people. Furthermore, there is resentment inducing political blaming of Asia and Asians for various economic or environmental "crimes", pervasive racial mockery in film and television, and casual assertions of Asian underhandedness and sneakiness in all their endeavours. I maintain that all of this cultural hostility has modeled resentment, hostility, anger, dislike, and uncompromising combativeness, as the normal and acceptable way of interacting with Asians.

What this means is that regardless of the specific racially inflected representation, the response is almost always going to be negative - tell people that Asians are the model-minority, then the response is resentment, tell people that Asian kids are the most bullied then the response is "its their own fault, Asians are anti-social", complain about anti-Asian racism in the black community and the response is "well Asians are racist and Koreans are channeling money out of the hood", and tell people that there is significant poverty amongst Asian-Americans and the response is indifference, or "blacks and Latinos have it worse!". The stereotypes are only the poisonous by-product of the underlying prejudices that enable Asians to be defined by people who at best are ignorant, or at worst, malicious.

This why I think that more evidence is required before we start asserting the model-minority label as the most significant cause of tensions between Asians and other minorities. If we stop reacting and look at the situation rationally, we might notice that America's culture of combative disassociation, casual racial harassment, and vindictive resentment, is more likely to shape people's reactions and interactions with Asian-Americans far more effectively than the specific model-minority label. This pervasive culture of dehumanizing and demeaning Asians - which also conditions other minorities in their behaviour and attitudes - more than outweighs any supposed positives stemming from the model-minority stereotype and probably shapes reactions to it.

My final thought on this is that I question the degree to which the model-minority stereotype actually influences federal and state policies towards other minorities. The narrative is as follows; the model minority stereotype is used as some kind of leverage by white America (usually GOP white folks) to justify cutting minority programs. But is this really true, or even reasonable to presume that the stereotype is even considered when policy changes are being discussed and put forward, or even that it influences such policy discussions? Certainly, an argument can be made that this label is bandied about (perhaps mostly by Asians who oppose it) in popular dialogue, but I see little reason to believe that the model-minority stereotype is used to justify any policy of any level of government. I think that it is somewhat grandiose to believe that this establishment actually needs model Asians to justify policies that affect other minorities, or even that the establishment uses this argument to establish a legal basis for "anti-black" policies.

So, in summary, the study highlighted the ontological gulf that exists between advocates and the community it seeks to represent. This gulf is apparently often filled with subjective opinions about the nature and character of Asian attitudes in lieu of a significant ontological basis. Furthermore, the study itself somewhat misleadingly reports these opinions as the actual attitudes and feelings of the community, which I recognize as a common phenomenon in Asian-American "culture" in which subjective thoughts and attitudes are unreasonably generalized as community or culture wide realities. Finally, the interviewees' attitudes towards the model-minority stereotype reflect what I have observed amongst many Asian-Americans; guilt for which they feel a need to show contrition, but it might also reflect an exaggerated and inflated notion of the actual influence that the stereotype may exert over the political process.

It does a disservice to Asian-Americans to downplay the fact that the model-minority stereotype reflects the degree to which the Asian voice is overpowered by the structures of racism in America - the white mainstream can shape our social identity and make it the basis upon which the Asian minority is perceived. Focusing on how the label affects other minorities' opinions of us instead of how the label reflects this damaging, profoundly embedded and overwhelming culture of hostile misrepresentation, is itself marginalizing Asians from their own experience. Communities come together when they recognize common experiences, at the root of the Asian experience is the notion that a shared humanity with Asians is impossible or unwanted - and it is unreasonable to believe that this mainstream position is rejected by other minorities. Giving weight to resentment caused by the label, as opposed to the racism that produces it is actually distancing Asians from any commonality with these other minority groups, and actually empowers the structures of racism.

Here is the link to the study..........
http://changelabinfo.com/reports/ChangeLab_Left-or-Right-of-the-Color-Line.pdf

Slipping Through The Cracks.

Asian Students And Critical Thinking.

During my research for my recent post called "Seven Things", I revisited the essay of Wesley Yang from a couple of years ago in which he detailed with angst-driven-drama the follies of raising Asian kids the "Asian Way". Overall, I found Yang's piece to, frustratingly, rely too heavily on presumptions informed by racial stereotypes rather than legitimate research. Yet, in re-reading the article, one point stood out for me which I didn't address in my original commentary on the piece........

It’s racist to think that any given Asian individual is unlikely to be creative or risk-taking. It’s simple cultural observation to say that a group whose education has historically focused on rote memorization and “pumping the iron of math” is, on aggregate, unlikely to yield many people inclined to challenge authority or break with inherited ways of doing things. 

This was an intriguing point and one that seems to present a fairly common belief about Asian cultures and the minds that they produce. I hear this a lot in Asian-America as one explanation for a number of seeming deficiencies in the Asian character that hinder our abilities to function effectively in American society, from attaining leadership positions, to being supposedly uncreative, poor critical thinkers, or just being unable to "pick up chicks". The sentiment being expressed here is that Asian culture as manifested through "Asian" educational systems churn out automatons with no charisma, leadership skills, or critical thinking skills. In my "Seven Things" post I already outlined how the "Asians are compliant" axiom fails to correspond to the reality of the historical record, or the regularly reported fact of Asian non-compliance in their (oftentimes life-risking) engagement with their governments.

Funnily enough, though, in Yang's case (and most for Asians raised in the US)  the school systems in Asia are not - indeed cannot possibly be - the problem here. What no-one seems to notice is that Yang (like most Asians raised in the US) was actually educated in American schools by American teachers using the American educational curriculum, yet, somehow through some unspecified process - apparently metaphysical in nature - the ghost of "Asian" education supersedes and exerts a greater influence over the abilities of children who never went through any Asian system than the eight-or-so-hours-a-day, five-days-a-week spent in American schools since first-grade.

Let's be clear about what is being said here; despite being entirely educated in the American education system, Yang implies that some of the character qualities and thinking abilities of some Asian-Americans may be more heavily influenced by the education system of some country thousands of miles away, where they never actually attended school, than the twelve years, or so, of the education they received in the American system by American teachers. This is plain nonsense.

It is actually a somewhat commonly accepted notion that Asian-American students lack a creative spark and the ability to reason critically that puts them at a disadvantage in the real world. This is most commonly heard in discussions on college admissions policies that reportedly find Asian-American students wanting in these areas, and also in discussions on the dearth of Asians in leadership, or management positions. The "Asian" system of rote memorization is often blamed yet, it is never explained how this could possibly affect Asian-Americans whose schooling took place entirely (or almost entirely) in the US - where, I'm told, education prizes critical thinking and creativity.

This raises some uncomfortable questions about how American educators engage with students of Asian descent in the school environment - if it is true, then why are Asian-American students graduating from American secondary education, and even college, without the ability to think critically or creatively? The nonsense of placing blame on Asian education systems allows us to conveniently avoid looking at the other, more probable, possibility that American schools and the educators who run them are failing the Asian students they are charged with educating. Usually it is the children themselves who are blamed, yet, it is difficult to imagine how students who, generally, have sufficient IQs, full family and community support, and who (by all accounts) are extremely attentive in the classroom, could not be capable of learning critical thinking skills or even creativity.

No, there has to be a problem in the way that Asian students are engaged by educators in the education system. If it is true that Asian students come through the American system without these important skills, then there are two possibilities; either the system itself is over-rating its own ability to teach children how to think, or educators are engaging with Asian students in such a way that these skills are not being imparted. The former point doesn't carry much weight because - again I'm told - that there are plenty of non-Asians who go through the system who have learned amazing thinking skills, so, apparently, the system works for some. This leaves the educators themselves and the way that Asian students are engaged in the classroom.

A common theme of my blog is to examine the profound anti-Asian hostility embedded in American culture - and acknowledging this may give us some insight into the nature of interactions between Asian-American students and American educators. In American culture, Asians are almost universally dehumanized and vilified in the rhetoric of its politicians. This cultural racism is so pervasive and accepted that it serves as the model for the permissiveness of racist behaviour towards Asians - as evidenced by the permissiveness of comfortable anti-Asian racist behaviour and sentiment in broadcast media. Furthermore, it limits the scope of how Asians can be conceived of such that mainstream America can "know" about us - and act accordingly - based entirely on their own cultural misrepresentations. I see no reason why educators would, as a rule, have a way of conceiving of Asians that is different or less demeaning than what is accepted as the cultural norm.

I'm not necessarily saying that educators are explicitly demeaning Asian students (although I don't rule this out), just that their engagement with the Asian students may be reinforcing stereotypes, and racial hierarchies. For example, have any of you Asian readers ever been in a situation - like I have - in which you came up with a great idea in your job, that everyone in the room ignored, only to have some white dude suggest exactly the same things minutes later and for everyone to jump on it like it was the most fantastic thing ever? The truth is - and we all know it - that American culture exalts the contributions of white males but downplays those of everyone else. There are studies that show that educators give more weight and attention to the input of boys than they do to girls - possibly because culturally we are conditioned to believe that boys (particularly Caucasian boys) have more value. It may be that this same process may be skewing how educators engage with Asian students in the classroom. For example, white boys may be given more time and opportunity to speak up in the classroom than their Asian counter-parts, and perhaps their input receives undue greater positive reinforcement than that of Asian students.

Given that we know this phenomenon exists across gender, it doesn't seem far-fetched that race might be a factor in educator engagement in the classroom - particularly for a group that is openly derided and dehumanized. Furthermore, given that American culture models racist behaviour towards Asians as normative, the question has to be asked how much racism is considered permissive in the classroom. If it is normal and acceptable for American culture to mock and deride the racial characteristics, contributions, or even achievements, of Asian people, then one wonders if this attitude is somehow reinforced in the classroom - hierarchies being reinforced by permitting demeaning behaviour towards Asian students.

In summary, we have a situation in which American students of Asian descent are charged with lacking creativity, and the ability to think critically. At the same time we know that as a general rule that the students in question (those with college potential) record high IQ levels, strong family support, strong community culture of educational attainment, as well as strong participation in extra-curricula activities. Bear in mind also, that America's educators take great pride in the fact that they have been able to take black and Latino students from impoverished, violent, criminal, abused backgrounds, with no parental, or community support, and turn them into good students.Yet, despite their seemingly advantageous background, Asian-American students are graduating high schools across the country supposedly unable to think or innovate? Even more implausibly still, it is implied - by Asians like Yang, and non-Asians alike - that the "Asian System" of rote memorization may bear some responsibility for this state of affairs.

I maintain that this is a ludicrous theory and that if Asian-American students are, indeed, failing to learn critical thinking in the American school system, then it is the American system and/or the American educators who bear responsibility for this - not some foreign school system thousands of miles away. Of course, there are those who would move the goalposts and argue that "Asian" culture teaches non-questioning compliance and, so, this is to blame. But what this would mean is that Asian parents are actively telling their children to not comply (like the irony?) with their American teachers' methods of supposedly teaching critical thinking. We all know that this is nonsense.

A more likely scenario is that anti-Asian prejudice is seeping into the classroom environment and may be shaping the manner in which American educators engage with Asian students. This is not far-fetched given that we know that Asian children experience higher levels of racial bullying in American schools - that in itself may partially account for why some Asian kids stay silent in the classroom, and itself raises questions of how much racist behaviour is permitted in the classroom.

Of course, blaming Asian culture is moot if it turns out that Asians have no problem thinking critically, and that these accusations exist solely as a means for justifying discrimination in the workplace and college admissions. With that in mind I will leave you with this link to a study that purports to show the abilities of students around the world to......

......to apply knowledge and skills in key subject areas and to their ability to analyse, reason and communicate effectively as they pose, interpret and solve problems in a variety of situations.

...that is, think critically. Korean students scored highest (along with Finns), and Japanese students were in the top five.

Seven Things.....

...That Hurt Our Feelings.

I came upon this article at a site called Diversity Inc., via the 8Asians blog, that relates seven things people (non-Asians presumably) should never say to Asian executives - although I think Asians in any field or position of employment would be equally troubled by them. There are a couple things about the article (and 8Asians blogpost) that are of interest, and illustrate how I believe - and have written about in several posts - the way that Asian-Americans engage in race dialogue ultimately misses the point when it comes to commentary on anti-Asian prejudice.

The first point of interest is how "offensiveness", once again, defines and characterizes the way that we talk about our experiences of racism. According to the 8Asians post, the Diversity Inc. article shows why these questions are potentially offensive, and although the article itself makes brief mention of how expression of these stereotypes could reveal underlying discrimination, it doesn't really explore this notion in the ensuing article. As I've written about in several places, our tendency to react and respond to racism by being offended misses the point of how stereotypes can affect us. On a side note, I would conjecture that this type of Asian-American commentary has a feminine character possibly due to the fact that it is Asian female perspective that has come to dominate the Asian-American narrative, and it is the feminine voice that has modeled our commentary on race.

If racism is simply "offensive" to us, then we really have no cause or reason to organize against it because the fundamental solution to being offended about something is to grow a thicker skin. In turn, this means that the cultural and social structures that promote and propagate racist attitudes towards Asians have no real reason to change because the problem is our feelings. Racist attitudes against Asians in the media, culture, and politics, all point to a culture of casual racism that is comfortably low-key, yet often potentially casually life threatening or violent. Continuing to present our experiences of casual racism, or racial insensitivity, as a mere affront to our emotions is inappropriate and to continue to think of and explore anti-Asian racism through this filter offers only intellectual stagnation.

I won't go into each question in detail, but here is a list of the questions (copy pasted directly from the 8Asians post).

• "You must be the IT person.".  
• “You aren’t like them” or “You don’t act very Asian.” 
• “Asian Americans are not risk takers.” 
• “Where are you from? No, where are you really from?” or “When are you going to go  home?” or “How often do you go home?” 
• “Oh, you speak English good!” or “Do you speak your language?” 
• “You’re not a minority because all Asians are rich and successful.” 
• “You’re not Asian, you’re from India.”

Here's rub; in and of themselves, most of these questions are not even all that offensive - granted that could be my subjective opinion, but I think that if we are really honest with ourselves we would admit that most of these questions have no real profoundly offensive quality - although we would have cause for concern. Yes, when we are asked these questions we can justifiably roll our eyes, and sigh to ourselves that we may be dealing with another individual who may be honestly ignorant, or just plain rude, but to become offended is, in some ways, accepting loss of control over yourself. These questions are, however, problematic because they hint at a profound, casual, and even a dangerously oblivious, discrimination.

In reality, far from merely causing offence, these questions reveal some deep-rooted beliefs that mainstream America takes as axioms which may indicate that Asians are being casually (but profoundly) discriminated against because of socially acceptable stereotypes derived from racist attitudes. In short, if you encounter people in your place of work who make remarks like these - particularly those in supervisory positions - then you probably have good cause to think that the people who believe these stereotypes may also be limiting your opportunities. So, don't become offended - that is just inappropriate, and diminishes the potential severity of the issue.

The second, and more significant, point of interest about the article is its brief allusion to management and leadership qualities. This is what the article says.....

Not only are they (Asians) stereotyped as not leadership material, but their cultural norms are interpreted by U.S. born executives as proving the stereotype.....“In America, the leadership skill is defined by how confrontational, direct and aggressive you are,”

I just don't agree that aggressiveness, or being confrontational, are as significantly valued leadership qualities in the West as this quote would seem to suggest. Unless you are in a martial profession, or sports, or any line of work that specifically requires aggressiveness, then aggression and confrontation, just don't go down too well with co-workers or underlings alike. In fact, if you are in a service profession, then these qualities definitely put you at a disadvantage as a leader if you are in the business of keeping customers happy. Leadership requires far more than testosterone for it to be considered successful and this idea that aggression and confrontation are highly valued is little more than a red-herring. Yet, it seems to me that in an extremely ironic twist, some Asian-Americans seem to have a caricatured, stereotyped, notion of  leadership as it is practiced and conceived of in western cultures.

My experiences in the workplace leave me skeptical about claims that non-Asians ( i.e. white dudes - let's be honest) have some kind of superior aptitude for leadership. Most of the white dudes that I've worked with have actually been poor leaders who attained their position through kissing the right superiors' butts, and shitting on their co-workers at opportune moments. Asians forget that massaging the right peoples' egos gets you noticed more than actually possessing leadership qualities. Of course, once in a leadership position the facade often falls away and any shortcomings are quickly and painfully revealed.

Some might say that this simply shows that white dudes are better at maneuvering themselves into leadership positions - supporting the idea that culturally they are better suited to leadership. The problem here is that having the skills to manipulate yourself into a leadership position doesn't equate to having aptitude for leadership once you are there. And let's be honest; the path to consideration for leadership for a white dude is significantly smoother than for other demographics - neutral or positive presumptions and such.

Unless a white dude has an arm growing out the side of his head, it is safe to assume that he will be more readily accepted without too much questioning - there are few (if any) negative race specific preconceived stereotypes about white males and so it is likely that face value goes further. So the system fosters ease of integration into leadership circles. Asian-Americans also overlook the fact that American culture is as much about bluster as it is about substance. Only seeming to have the talent and drive to achieve fame, wealth, or positions of leadership, is what most of us mistake for good leadership skills when, in fact, the bluster is most often greater than the substance. This is almost like the American version of the "Asian" phenomenon of "face-saving".

This isn't to say that there are no good white leaders - that would be absurd - I'm simply saying that we tend to mythicize leadership qualities instill by American culture to such a degree that we lose all perspective second-guessing our own abilities. The real question is; do Asian cultures produce individuals who lack aptitude, or is America's cultural antagonism towards Asians conditioning Asian-Americans to believe that they have no inherent leadership qualities?

According to the "general consensus" - to which many Asian-Americans themselves adhere - Asian cultures instill compliance and deference to authority. Asians are, thus, followers, and not leaders. Given this axiom, we should expect to find few, or no, examples of rebellions, or uprisings, in Asian histories - compliant people don't revolt because they are, well, compliant. Yet, Asian history is full of rebellions and uprisings against unpopular or unjust rulers and officials. Even more tellingly, further evidence that Asian compliance is a myth can be seen in the often volatile relationship between Asian societies and their governments.

It is often said that Asian compliance manifests as a lack of active engagement in politics. Yet, history and the news - for those who notice - provides ample evidence to the contrary. Asians engage with their government through protest all the time - that is, they are extremely outspoken in challenging authorities in their own societies. Even in China - I say "even" because China actively suppresses dissent on top of being, supposedly, a culture of compliance - I am always reading about some protest somewhere in which average Chinese citizens are risking their lives to express their dissatisfaction with government. All over Asia you might notice that Asians routinely stage protests against their own leaders - even in countries where they might face death for doing so. Does this sound like compliance? No, it actually sounds like a culture of non-compliance. When you start to notice these things it becomes increasingly difficult to not believe that the "Asians are inherently compliant" type explanations are little more than cheap throw-away justifications for discrimination.

I think, therefore, that it is more likely that Asian-Americans do not make it into leadership positions because American culture has conditioned many of them to believe that they are unsuited to it, has conditioned mainstream America to think of Asians predominantly in demeaning ways, and thus, devalues any authority or leadership qualities that some of us may possess. My sense is that mainstream America is so conditioned to think of Asians derogatorily that this perspective overcomes their ability to objectively assess leadership qualities of Asian-Americans. The result is that because of such profound conditioning, both mainstream America and Asian-Americans themselves believe Asians to be less suitable for authority even though evidence to the contrary may be staring them in the face.  What this suggests is that if culture does play a role in shaping leadership qualities then for Asian-Americans it is American culture as much as anything else that provides the impediments to Asian-American leadership potential.

In summary, I would say that Asian-Americans are doing themselves a disservice by seeming to mythicize leadership in such an unrealistic way. The reality is that the entire culture of America is set up to ensure that white males succeed and that the door never closes on them the way it does on others. This is not to dismiss the idea that there may be some cultural conditions affecting smooth integration of Asians, but I believe that we, and mainstream America, are exaggerating the degree to which this may be the case. By doing this we are enabling the justification of discrimination.

I will finish by saying that cultivating a state of mind that responds to racial insensitivity, or discrimination, with offence is, funnily enough, not a quality becoming of a leader. The reason is, that being offended draws a line in the sand but offers no solutions. A leader,on the other hand, will assess the situation at hand, identify the ramifications of it, and find ways to get passed it, go around it, or overcome it. Being offended has no place in the fight against discrimination or in the skill-set of strong-minded leaders. It is also fundamentally a feminine stance that has no meaningful place in the dialogue and that also happens to offer little by way of solution.