YouTube Creators for Change: Natalie Tran | White Male Asian Female

A Missed Opportunity.

There is a YouTube video by Australian YouTube star, Natalie Tran, that has been making the rounds in Asian cyberspace recently in which she exposed the cyber hate that she receives due to her being in a relationship with a white man.

Here's the video.....

 

Although Tran's documentary is certainly well-intentioned, and has received some considerable praise, I can't help but feel disappointed.

At the beginning of the documentary Tran shows us some examples of the abusive comments she receives, and declares that ...

...just to add salt to the wound, a lot of these comments come from fellow Asians.....these comments are pretty common. A lot of other Asian women who date Caucasian men, and have some kind of presence online, also receive a lot of these comments as well.....

Neither of these points sit well. The second point is problematic because the implication is that Asian women are somehow uniquely afflicted by this kind of cyber bullying. In fact, there is ample documented evidence that all but proves that any woman of any race with an online presence who dates interracially will be targeted because of it. Plus, because the internet can be anonymous, it is almost impossible to actually identify anyone who posts comments on any site, so we generally have no way of knowing if the people leaving hate comments are actually Asian.

Tran's first point is more intriguing.

According to Tran "a lot" - but not all - of these hate comments are from "fellow" Asians, which makes me wonder why she chose to focus only on seeking answers to why Asians would be attacking her in this way? Is Asian opposition to her personal dating choices somehow a greater crime than, let's say, white opposition? If so, why? Sure, she feels that it is "adding insult to injury" when Asians attack her in this way, but why she feels this isn't clear. If she is suggesting that Asian hate comments are more hurtful because they are a betrayal of some kind of solidarity amongst Asians, then this merely exposes a huge irony that I will expound upon a little later.

During Tran's interview of Asian-American dating coach, JT Tran, he stated that Asian men leave hate comments because of their life-experiences. Although, overall, JT did a great job of describing some of the issues faced by Asian men, I would argue that there is more nuance to the relationship between Asian men's experiences and online vitriol - which I will discuss later. For most Asian men, the racism we experience, and the anger it fosters, motivates us to strive for success and accomplishment in many different areas of life and in no way drives us to become cyber-bullies. The point was overly simplistic, and merely reinforced the the stereotype of loser Asian guys leaving bitter comments on Asian websites.

More significantly, juxtaposing Tran's dating issues with the racism Asian men face creates an implicit relegation of Asian men's experiences to a mere sub-context of Asian female dating choices. The gender-specific racism that Asian men experience deserves to be a significant part of Asian-American thought and dialogue in its own right and not as something that gets spoken about only when it negatively affects Asian women's dating choices. Sadly, we just don't see many investigative documentaries that focus solely on anti-Asian male racism in America. This is the irony of Tran's apparent sense of betrayal that Asians are leaving hate comments: our "community" is a mere apparition when it comes to Asian men's experiences that only appears as part of an apologetic for interracial dating.

There is another irony that is worth noting: Asian men's complaints about culturally induced difficulties in dating are routinely dismissed - mostly by Asian progressives - yet, when an Asian woman experiences opposition to her dating choices, we get a documentary about it. This, perhaps, is another example of how "community" is a poor choice of word.

Furthermore, there is an implicit (although, perhaps, unintentional) shifting of the burden of responsibility to explain the actions of a few Asian commenters onto the entire community of Asian men. It does not logically follow that Asian men would be able to explain the online anti-social behaviour of other Asian men just because they are Asian men. It is the job and expertise of psychologists and behaviourists to explain behaviour and psychological states - particularly when it comes to anti-social behaviour on the internet. It was certainly appropriate to ask Asian men to describe Asian men's anger and experiences, but not to explain the behaviour of online trolls.

There are a number of factors that researchers have discovered contribute to online trolling. These include, a sense of no accountability due to anonymity, desensitization due to a general toxic internet environment, and a lack of consequences. Interestingly, other studies suggest that the general tone of other comments on an issue contributes to trolling behaviour. The ramifications of this highlights the most glaring problem with Tran's investigation: there is a cycle of vicious online commentary between Asian men and women that mutually demeans each other that Tran did not address.

The nature of the sometimes vitriolic dialogue between Asian men and women could be driving hate comments and might not necessarily be the result of anti-Asian male racism Asian men experience in their daily lives. It is mere presumption that those who leave hate comments are actually responding from a place personal pain -  they could merely be responding to anti-Asian male comments left by Asian women on an existing or previous thread .

Instead of an un-nuanced assertion that Asian men's anger about their experiences leads to trolling, it would be more accurate for Tran to have noticed that the hate comments she receives are merely part of an ongoing online dialogue between some Asian men and women that is mutually hateful. In other words, based on research, Asian men who troll Tran, are likely to be embroiled in the cycle of hate comments to which some Asian women seem happy to contribute. This means that the hate directed at Tran is merely a by-product of an online situation created by both Asian men and Asian women. It would have been nice for Tran to have investigated this - significant - aspect of the story. I would have liked to have seen Tran cornering Asian women and asking them why other Asian women leave hate comments about Asian men that contribute to the toxic environment of mutual distrust that is a major causative factor in the hate comments Tran receives about her relationship.

To summarize, Tran's documentary missed the point by not addressing the online environment of mutual disdain and hostility that has been created by some Asian women and men. The hate comments she receives seem to me to be most likely a reflection of this environment than an outcome of how Asian men are likely to react to anti-Asian male racism. By failing to seek answers to why some Asian women post anti-Asian male tweets, write demeaning news articles about Asian men, or generally show disdain for Asian men's humanity, Tran's documentary shed scant light on the issue she was investigating. 

Interracial Dating And The Disparity.

Are Asian Male Concerns Justified?

There was an interesting discussion over on the bigWOWO website that began as a post about the increasing visibility of black female and white male pairings in popular cultural productions. Naturally, the discussions moved rapidly onto the Asian-American disparity in interracial dating. The most interesting point to be raised concerned the idea of whether there is merit to the, sometimes, zealous, concern exhibited by Asian men for the reportedly-higher-than-usual-outmarriage/dating-rates-of Asian women and the documented reluctance of women of all races to consider Asian men as suitable partners. Or, is the subject unworthy of exploration, that can and should be dismissed as mere navel-gazing for a "privileged" demographic?

Some suggest that by way of comparison to other issues like discrimination in the workplace and race-engendered poverty, the complaints of Asian men on their stereotype-hampered dating and marriage opportunities are merely trite distractions from more significant issues. On the face of it, the idea that discrimination in the workplace is more significant than attitudes in dating choices that discriminate against specific racial groups seems logical. Denying or hampering people's opportunities to find gainful employment or be treated fairly in the promotion process seem vastly more important than whether any given Asian man is able to get a date. Yet, the two issues are interconnected and more similar than most of us are willing to acknowledge.

Institutional racism no longer exists. There are no laws that mandate racial discrimination in employment and housing - in fact, those found to have pursued a practice of prejudice can be, and often are, levied with penalties and legal judgements for doing so. What this means is that in the hiring/promotion process, housing, and any other activity of society, prejudice is only - can only - ever be practiced as a matter of personal choice. If an employer decides before he or she has interviewed an applicant that they will not be hired because of the race of said applicant, then that is personal-choice discrimination, which may be based on ideas and beliefs derived from cultural stereotyping that shape the employer's attitudes and willingness to work or live in close proximity with minorities. The similarity to racialized partner choices is obvious.

Stereotypes and preconceived notions shape people's decision making in hiring and housing just as much as they shape their decisions in personal relationships. Refusing to hire or rent to a minority person because you don't want to spend eight-hours a day with them in the office, or see them next door every morning and evening when you come and go from your home, is fundamentally the same process as dismissing minorities as life partners. This is especially true when both actions could arguably be the result of an adherence to casual media racial stereotypes that propagates ideas of things like minority criminality or diminished masculinity.

Ostensibly, it might seem absurd to consider dating and marriage opportunities to be anywhere near as significant as workplace and housing discrimination. Yet, underlying dating and marriage is the biologically-driven function of procreation and partnering, which happen to be one of the primary functions of most of the animal and plant life on the planet. In fact, apart from the survival instinct, the drive to procreate and partner is probably one of the most fundamental drives in human nature - and sometimes the drive to leave progeny outweighs even the survival instinct, as evidenced by accounts of people risking their own lives to save their own, or even other people's, children. Concerns about prejudices and derogatory stereotypes that hamper one's capacity to find a partner and engage in the function of procreation taps into and threatens an extremely profound human physiological function. Clearly, this is not a laughing matter, nor is it necessarily less significant than issues of discrimination in other areas of life, and neither should these concerns be summarily dismissed as merely the whines of men who can't get dates.

In fact, there is no moral difference between personal race-based preferences in employment and housing and in personal race-based choices in whom people choose to date and marry. The difference is one of legality, yet, it raises uncomfortable questions about the role that civil society plays in maintaining racist attitudes and hierarchies, particularly in the creative arts industries that possibly exert the greatest influence over society's conception of racial minorities and these minority's capacity to fully enjoy the fruits of democratic life.

A comparison to the struggle for gay marriage rights and illustrates the powerful role that civil society can play in bringing about political change. Promotion of gay marriage rights has occurred both in the legislative and judicial branches of government but, interestingly, has also seen a strong promotional drive amongst private institutions particularly cultural institutions. In other words, not only has the fight for gay marriage rights had a legal component, there has also been a significant drive within civil society to promote it, especially in the media.

An article in the online magazine Wired suggests that this drive in civil society to present positive images of gay men and women that normalize their life-choices has correlated with an increase of tolerance and acceptance of gay marriage. This is what it says...

Back in 2008—clearly a big year for LGBT rights—the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and a research team from Harris Interactive did a survey of more than 2,000 U.S. adults 18 and older and found that two in 10 of them had changed their views of gays and lesbians in the previous five years to a more favorable one. 

Their reasons? Some said it was because they knew a gay person, some said news programs shifted their views, others noted that family or friends had persuaded them. Also, 34 percent said their views were influenced by seeing gay or lesbian characters on TV, and 29 percent said it was by a gay or lesbian character on film.

What is significant here, is this interplay between the work of governing institutions and the activities of civil society. Healthy democracies adhere to a strict separation of government influence in civil society, yet, as the article above illustrates, the activities of civil society have the potential to create shifts in public opinion to the extent that it can affect the degree of support any given issue receives and, hence, the political dialogue itself.

Since the fight for gay marriage rights has involved, both a political activism to legalize it and the social activism of civil society to create more positive perceptions of, and accepting attitudes for, gay partnerships in general, it is inconsistent to claim that society and politics view people's personal relationships - or more specifically, their opportunities to pursue relationships unhindered by political or societal sanction - as somehow irrelevant or less significant than other issues. The two-pronged assault on anti-gay prejudices that is legally discriminatory and socially hampers their pursuit of meaningful and open relationships offers a clear indication that both politics and civil society views freedom to pursue relationships, unhindered by prejudices, as a significant issue.

Thus, Asian men's concerns about the negative impact that racist attitudes and civil society-driven stereotypes have on their capacity to pursue meaningful relationships are far from insignificant. It is merely a measure of the marginalization of the Asian-American experience that these concerns are scorned by both the mainstream, but even more significantly, within Asian-America itself. What this amounts to is that even Asian-Americans are utilizing the structures and sensibilities of mainstream America to participate in the marginalization of Asian men.

The process of choosing a partner is one of the most significant decisions one can make in life, and is arguably the most important decision that many people will ever make, and for most people is the single most defining decision of their lives. Is it funny or deserving of eye-rolling impatience when Asian-American men notice that this primordial drive, that is fundamental to almost all biological existence, is being hampered and hindered by a civil society that normalizes dehumanizing stereotypes of them, and a political culture that plays off xenophobic doubts of Asian humanity to win votes? After all, limiting the growth, influence, and identity of any minority through demeaning them culturally is as serious as racist immigration policies that seek to do the same.

At this point, it is worth noting that there may be a specific demographic component that contributes to the heated nature of much of the dialogue on this issue that takes place mainly on internet spaces. My observation and sense is that those Asian men who complain the most vehemently about the disparity seem to hail largely from one of two age-groups; the mid- to late-teens (or high school graduate age), or the late-teen to early-, mid-twenties age range.

If this observation is accurate, this is significant because such young adults represent a demographic that we could call the "pre-accomplished" and that partnering anxieties amongst Asian men in this demographic may be amplified and interwoven with the normal maturation stage experienced by men of all groups during which they strive to discover a mature identity. In other words, at an age when there is a biological and cultural shift into a life stage when it is normal to notice and want to connect with the opposite sex, young Asian men discover that culture and society have created an environment that hampers this normal process.

What this could also suggest is the possibility that the shift from childhood into young adulthood, and from high-school to college, for Asian-American men marks a first direct acquaintance with the outcome of gender-specific anti-Asian racism. That is not to say that young Asian-American boys do not experience racism prior to high-school graduation - which many, perhaps most of us, do. It means that for many young Asian-American men the shift into the college and young adult environment comes with a realization that all of that casual racism they may have experienced throughout childhood from peers reflects far more than merely "kids being mean", and may, in fact, reflect a pervasive conditioning process for American society that demeans Asian people and their cultures, but also normalizes and legitimizes mainstream America's intrusion into our personal and private sexual particulars as well our opportunities to fulfill fundamental human drives like partnering and procreation.

Those (specifically, within the community) who condemn and ridicule young Asian men for reacting angrily to such a process are not only skirting the negative side of moral behaviour, they are launching a fundamental attack on the wider process of Asian-American empowerment and efforts towards normalization of our community issues. For instance, we pay lip-service to the poor state of mental health awareness within the community and decry the culture of shame of this issue within Asian-America. Yet, all too often - actually more often than not - Asian men are dismissed as pathetic and annoying for reacting angrily to what is an injustice as significant as workplace discrimination. All of the emotional and possibly psychological processes that go hand-in-hand with that be damned.

In summary, given that personal choice drives both workplace discrimination and partnering choices, it seems arbitrary to claim some kind of moral primacy for one issue over the other. Thus, Asian male concerns about the cultural and social hampering of their partnering opportunities are legitimate concerns - as legitimate as concerns about cultural and social stereotypes that make some people not want to live near or hire minorities. Both are about personal choice. Granted, the aggressive and sometimes abusive approach of some Asian men - usually on internet spaces - is not conducive to dialogue, but to label even this type of reaction as merely some kind of bitterness or lack of game, avoids the possibility that there may be a poorly mapped road for how to deal with anti-Asian racism in general, and gender-specific, anti-Asian male racism in particular. In short, a summary dismissal of the subject is tantamount to marginalizing a demographic because they have not figured out a way to address the racism in their lives.

Asian male concerns about casual racist beliefs that hinder their partnering opportunities arguably derive from the same process that drives workplace discrimination, and, thus, deserves a more empathetic response from the community, as well as a more significant place in the Asian-American dialogue on our racialized experiences. To do otherwise is to uphold racism.

Do Asian Men Exist In Asian-American Movies?

Well...... It Depends!

I came across an old post from 2010 on the YouOffendMeYouOffendMyFamily blog that asked some uncomfortable questions about possible invisibility of Asian men in Asian-American literature.  As this YOMYOMF post from a few years back suggested, there may well be bias in some Asian-American produced literature in which Asian men are rarely given romantic prominence opposite Asian female protagonists. Uncomfortably, those novels listed in the YOMYOMF post are all written by Asian-American women. But, this got me thinking about Asian-American film, and how the Asian-American gender relationship plays out in that particular cultural arena.

Wikipedia has a page devoted to Asian-American films that provides a convenient list (and links) of one-hundred-and-twenty-seven films deemed to belong in the category. I took the liberty of doing a casual study of the listed movies to try and gauge how we represent ourselves. Since I was hoping to gauge the degree to which Asian-American films represent Asian men in leading or love-interest roles, I decided to slim down the list to include only those movies that are full-length and have narratives that call for a (archetypally) masculine lead or love interest. So, I omitted documentary works, short-films, films in which an Asian male lead (i.e. a "masculine" lead) was not really called for (e.g family movies, or girl power movies - like "Eden") and older movies (because when these films were made pre-1970's, the Asian race dynamic was vastly different than what it became post 1980).

I ended up with around 66 full-length narrative films, from which I extrapolated the following information; gender and race of the writer (either screenplay or novel derived), the race and gender of the leading male and female characters. Bear in mind that I have not watched all (or even most) of these movies, but instead read the plot outlines on their respective Wikipedia pages, or Internet Movie Database site - not perfect, but I think sufficient enough for a rudimentary study that I hope will lead to more questioning within the community. I admit that I discovered some interesting things.

Out of 66 films, 19 were written by women, and 47 by men. Interestingly, even though the category is "Asian-American Films", a significant number of these 66 films were written by non-Asians - of the 19 films with female writers, 2 of those were white women, of the 47 written by men, 18 were written by white men, and 3 were white/Asian male collaborations. So, even though there appears to be an ostensible gender disparity in these productions, once we subtract those "Asian-American films" written by non-Asians, then this disparity decreases significantly. And, of course, since so many of the listed movies were written by white males, there are some questions about what actually makes a movie "Asian-American", a subject which I will not delve into in this post.

Of the 26 movies written by Asian men, 15 had both an Asian male and Asian female lead/prominent roles and 4 had an Asian male and white female lead (the rest either did not specity any female leads or their presence was difficult to gauge from the Wiki Plot outlines). Of the 21 Asian movies written by white men (or Asian male white male collaboration), 13 had Asian male leads, 3 of which were Asian male/female co-leads, and 8 were written with white males as the love interest or main lead opposite Asian female characters. Of the movies written by white women, one featured an Asian male lead with a white female lead (Restless), the other featured Asian male/female co-leads (Eat A Bowl Of Tea - based on a novel by an Asian woman).

But, it is the movies written by Asian women that are the most interesting. Of the 17, a whopping 12 feature either a white male lead or love interest with an Asian female lead, or even when there is a prominent Asian male role, their characters are somehow not eligible as love interests. This means that even white dudes have a better record at writing lead roles for Asian men in Asian themed movies. Interestingly, I included two gay themed movies with Asian male writers (Colma The Musical and The Wedding Banquet), and in one of those, the love interest is also a white male (but there is an Asian male lead). Here's a rundown of the Asian male devoid Asian female written films......

Bam Bam and Celeste        No prominent Asian male roles
The Beautiful Country        Asian lead character is a child - the leading
                                           "men" characters are white
Falling for Grace                Asian female, white male love interest
                                          Asian male "lead" character is Asian
                                          female's brother
Half-Life                             Two Asian male leads, one is the brother
                                          of the female lead,the other gay, white
                                          male love interest for main Asian female
                                          character.
The Joy Luck Club             Asian men are bastards. No explanation
                                          required.
The Mistress of Spices       Indian Asian female, white love interest
The Princess of Nebraska White gay male lead character, no apparent
                                           prominent Asian male roles
Red Doors                         Asian male character a family member,
                                          white male love interest for eldest daughter
The Sensei                        White male love interest.
Thousand Pieces of Gold  White male love interest plus, Asian male
                                          character is a bastard.
Thousand Years of Good Prayers  White male love interest
Tie a Yellow Ribbon            Asian woman seemingly in love with her
                                          adoptive white brother.

One of the films written by Asian females feature an Asian man in lead roles with a white female love interest - Never Forever - and a three of the movies - Golden Gate (David Henry Hwang), Charlotte Sometimes, and Disney's Wendy Hu (Victor Cheung) - are written by Asian men, or have Asian men as part of the writing team, and they also feature white male leads and love interests for the Asian female leads. But, overall, it seems that Asian men are underrepresented as leads and/or love interests in movies written by Asian women. On the other hand, the majority of Asian-American films written by Asian-American men seem more inclusive of Asian females and provide opportunities for Asian female actors. Again, I offer the caveat that I have not watched most of these films and so I cannot make any qualitative assessment of how any of the characters were portrayed (regardless of race).

But, based on the plot lines, it seems as though films written by Asian women, for the most part, follow in the footsteps of the mainstream media's habit of excluding Asian males from roles where they can be the love interest. Even white dudes - when they write serious "Asian"- themed screenplays - seem to have a better record at giving Asian men lead roles in Asian-themed films. Ouch!

Notes:

Here is the list of movies written by Asian men that feature prominent Asian female roles....

Asian Stories, Better Luck Tomorrow, Catfish In Barbecue Sauce, CharlotteSometimes, Close Call,  The Debut, Fakin Da Funk, Kissing Cousins, Living On Tokyo Time, The Rebel, Robot Stories, Undoin, West 32nd, Wendy Hu, Yokai King

And the rest of the movies written by Asian men that I used in the survey....

Amerasian, Baby, Colma The Musical,  Golden Gate, Green Dragon, Miami Connection, Shanghai Calling, Shanghai Kiss, Supercapitalist, The Wedding Banquet, Yellow,

Movies written by white dudes which have a white male lead/love interest opposite an Asian female character......

China Girl, Come See Paradise, Heaven & Earth, Lani Loa, Make Your Move, Redwood Curtain, Snow Falling On Cedars, GranTorino.

White male writers with Asian male leads or prominent roles....

Americanese, The Corruptor, Dark Matter, Dim Sum Funeral, Drive, Fast and Furious, Harold And Kumar (2 Movies), Replacement Killers, White On Rice, Chan Is Missing, Revenge Of The Green Dragons, TakeOut 

Movies with Asian female writers that feature prominent Asian male male leads/roles....... 

Never Forever, The Picture Bride, Raspberry Magic, Shangri La Cafe, Strawberry Fields 

To be fair, The Joy Luck Club did have prominent Asian male leads, but qualitatively, the roles were somewhat negative overall.

The two movies written by white women that feature Asian male leads...

Eat A Bowl Of Tea, Restless                

Emasculation And Asian Male Sexuality.

Are We Afraid Of Free Choice For Asian Men?

In the wake of the recent tragic shooting in Isla Vista, in which Elliot Rodger murdered his two room-mates and their friend as well as three random people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, a spate of blog posts and news articles were published that sought to make sense of the tragedy. What I found interesting is the way that writers with different agendas focused on their own specific aspect of the tragedy; feminists focused on Rodger's misogyny, black folks focused on his anti-black racism, gun-control advocates focused on his guns, and gun-control opponents focused on his mental illness.

One interesting perspective came from Jenn over at the Reappropriate blog, who coined a new word - misogylinity - to describe what she views as an unhealthy adoption by a segment of Asian-American men of hyper-sexuality as a means to define their masculinity as a response to America's cultural emasculation of Asian men. In short, Jenn suggests that this creates an environment of "woman-hate" - the kind that Elliot Rodger latched onto to justify his misogyny - that leads this particular group of Asian men to disrespect and demean women. Whilst acknowledging the need for a positive response to the emasculation of Asian men, Jenn question whether we should be more nuanced about the kind masculine ideals we should (politically) push for. Her suggestion is to somehow "de-link" sexuality from masculinity such that sexual conquest does not come to define what it means to be a man.....

But let’s be clear: this sex-based masculinity is not actual masculinity. It is something else: let’s call it “misogylinity”..........................Too often, we narrowly (and sometimes uncritically) promote pop culture images of Asian American men in sexual or romantic roles (where the character’s explicit heterosexuality alone defines the character as empowering and masculine). Too often, we revere characters like JT Tran, who sells an Asian American-specific version of pick-up artistry workshops, and David Choe, who hosted a popular Asian American-focused podcast that intended to subvert Asian American emasculation through real or manufactured tales of sexual conquest (where he also allegedly confessed to rape).

Firstly, it is worth pointing out that the first half of that paragraph above is somewhat at odds with my own experience. I don't ever remember any Asian-American - male or female, and certainly no-one of any significant influence whatsoever - actually promoting any Asian male media character based solely on their heterosexuality alone. On the contrary, almost all commentators on the subject seek to promote Asian male (and female) characters in the media who are well rounded and human. People seem to want to promote Asian male characters who are physically strong, emotionally complex, and yes, not devoid of sexuality. But it is certainly a stretch to claim that Asian masculinity is being promoted by way of sexuality alone.

At the same time, does it really need saying why there is (and should be) a focus on Asian male heterosexuality? How about this; it is specifically Asian male heterosexuality that is being maligned and demeaned by American culture? I am not aware of any habit or practice within mainstream culture of demeaning gay Asian men based on their homosexuality. So, suggesting that there might be other ways of addressing sexual dehumanization of Asian men is somewhat absurd - akin to holding you hands over your groin protectively to defend against punches to your face. What other Asian male sexuality is or has been under attack? That aside, the main thrust of the piece is that Asian men who adopt a hyper-sexualized identity as the basis for their masculinity are, basically, to be marginalized by the community at large.

In the latter half of the paragraph, two men in particular are offered up as examples of the kind of Asian man and Asian man behaviour we should eschew. Pick-up artist, JT Tran, and Korean-American artist, and sex fantasist, David Choe, are presented as the kind of slimy characters we would all do well to avoid. The argument is that we should not be giving time to, or supporting, those Asian men - like Tran and Choe - who promote the idea of sex and sexual conquest as some kind of remedy to the emasculation of Asian men. The reason is that they are - it is asserted - misogynists (both) or possible-rapists (Choe) whose hyper-sexualized personas are implicitly "oppressing" other identities....

Do we sometimes let the fight to reclaim Asian American masculinity rationalize the recreation of systems of oppression against other Asian American identities?

I am not going to defend Asian PUA or Choe (still not sure what his sin was), but what I do find disturbing is the puritanical and un-nuanced judgment that hyper-sexualized Asian men or simply the pursuit of a hyper-sexualized lifestyle as an expression of masculinity is somehow morally reprehensible and something we should marginalize out of the community. The piece never gets around to explaining why a masculinity that is heavily informed by hyper-sexuality is implicitly bad. The closest it comes to an explanation is to suggest that hyper-sexual Asian men are somehow implicitly misogynistic, but a broad-brush assertion is a weak argument for a proposal that seems to seek to interfere in individuals' lives on the grounds of our own presumed ethical superiority.

The first problem here is that we live in 21st Century America, and there exists a rather vibrant culture of casual sex and casual pick-up in which both men and women are happy and eager to participate and both sexes use eachother. Bars and clubs (not to mention the college campus bars and notorious spring breaks) all over the US are packed every weekend with single people whose goal is to hook-up - and it is entirely consensual. This means that there is an environment where people like Tran who choose (or merely possess) a highly sexualized identity are welcomed - so in order to imply a moral transgression by Tran, one would have to make sweeping moral judgements on the lifestyle itself. Good luck with that, and if you succeed, then welcome to Taliban USA. Sadly, it is difficult (and unethical) to to impose our own set of ethical values on the actions of willing consensual adults, but even worse, this idea that hyper-sexualized Asian men are a threat seems to merely echo white -supremacists ideas of the sexually rapacious Asian man who presents a threat to white womanhood.

The point here is that that lifestyle is a choice - and insinuating some kind of moral judgement on people who make different choices to ourselves is simply a repression of diverse individualities and nothing more. But worst of all, the idea that an identity that is based largely on sexuality is implicitly something to eschew is never argued effectively for in the post. The only way to answer this is with a question; why? Why is pursuing many sexual partners something we should pour moral scorn upon, and why is it wrong to have an identity that is based on high sexualization? The answer is that it is not - you just can't get passed that consenting adult issue.

Jenn's post calls on the community to redefine what we mean by, and how we present, Asian masculinity whilst inserting the caveat that sexuality based masculinity is to be avoided which, ironically, is an example of oppression of other Asian identities. Who made the judgement that says that masculine identity based on sexuality is wrong, inappropriate or, even, not empowering? Should we make highly sexualized Asian men into some kind of pariah caste because they have made a choice that - for whatever reason - has made some of us uncomfortable? Or, is it better to mind our own business and not try to control and judge other people's choices? How on earth can anyone claim to know that what individuals claim gives them a sense of empowerment is not actually giving them a sense of empowerment?

It is especially confounding that we are even talking about this since - as I pointed out in this comment - Asian feminists have for years presented an aggressive and independent sexuality as a means of empowerment - they (rightfully) choose their own sexuality and they can attach whatever importance to it that they choose; if Asian feminists choose to frame their sexuality as socially and culturally empowering, then so be it, and who are we to argue? Likewise, if there exist Asian men who feel their sexual conquests assuages America's dehumanization of them, who are we to tell them it does not? Jenn seems comfortable leaving room for the possibility that Asian female sexuality and the expression thereof can be politicized and empowering, yet erects (no pun) a moral barrier at the thought of Asian men finding empowerment through the exploration of their sexuality.

Here is where the problem with painting with a broad brush comes back to haunt you. Sexuality, for many people, is hugely integral to their character. People who have been in long-term relationships may still view their identity as highly sexualized and even base their sense of masculinity (or femininity) on their sexual endeavours with their partner. In fact, that sense of "conquest" of your partner does not necessarily go away for people in long-term relationships, and I would guess contributes greatly to the sense of femininity for women and masculinity for men. Are these people to be stigmatized too? Is getting many fucks out of a single partner equally as morally reprehensible as getting single fucks out of many partners? I need more convincing.

Of course, the argument that PUA offers a snake-oil remedy for Asian men who struggle to get dates that ultimately backfires is a legitimate one, and Jenn's piece makes much of the fact that Elliot Rodger felt even more desperate after apparently failing with PUA techniques - although it is not entirely clear that Rodger actually took any PUA classes. Regardless, the focus on that point (although valid - false advertising is false advertising, after all), for the purpose of supporting a vague moral argument to marginalize Asian men with high sex-drives also, sadly, deflects attention away from the fact that the field of psychotherapy also failed to reach Rodger. Yet, no-one has suggested that the failure of psychotherapy to create a meaningful psychological shift in Elliot Rodger reflects any failure on the part of the profession itself.

In the context of Asian and Asian-American mental health, the psychotherapeutic process is complicated by racial and cultural factors which have been documented to impede therapeutic success. Now, as a community, we sound off about Asian-American mental health, yet, in one of the clearest examples of an Asian-American whose mental state made him unreachable, we somehow conspire to miss the opportunity to highlight the unique challenges facing Asian-Americans with mental health issues. From what I understand, Rodger had been in therapy since childhood, and even though I cannot possibly know the specifics of his therapeutic plan, it is worth considering the possibility that the unique experience of cultural marginalization, normalized cultural dehumanization and emasculating stereotypes that promote demeaning behaviours and attitudes, might perhaps have been outside of the realm of experience for his therapists to address, even if they were Asian themselves.

All of this highlights some disturbing facts about emasculation and how we conceive of its character and effects on Asian men. Because Rodger focused his ravings on sexual conquest it is natural to consider his feelings of sexual disempowerment as the fundamental cause of his sense of emasculation. But this is merely narrow thinking. Rodger was - throughout his entire life, possibly before sexuality even became a factor for him - emasculated, even in childhood. This came about through bullying and marginalization. The emasculation of Elliot Rodger quite possibly had as much to do with an inability to assert himself in his social environment, or his inability to find an empowered voice that could enable him to assert control over his own experiences, as much as any inability to get laid. Are we really choosing to believe that Rodger killed mostly because he could not get laid, based on his arguably mad rantings?

If we do choose to follow this narrow understanding then we miss the opportunity to realize that emasculation is a form of dehumanization that attacks and demeans every aspect of a man. This includes their sexuality, but also other equally important aspects of their identity such as their sense of confidence, ability to provide for their family, or their opportunities for participation in the cultural life of their society. For example, men have rampaged when they have lost their job because being economically fruitful is implicit in a masculine identity. Emasculation is not just about sex if it was, then  how can we explain that fact that black men are hyper-sexualized, but there are still voices in that community who argue that this society emasculates black men by capping job opportunities, or stigmatizing their educational abilities.

The point here is that emasculation of minority men occurs in a number of ways, and as I pointed out above, there any number of qualities that we positively associate with masculinity that when compromised can lead to violent or misogynistic behaviour, so focusing on ideas of Asian male hyper-sexuality as being a dangerous echo of Elliot Rodger's type misogyny simply does not add up, and to think of it that way might serve an agenda, but does little to improve our understanding of the nuanced nature of racially inflected emasculation.

We should not lose sight of the fact that emasculation is about control, or more specifically about the power to control a man's life, social identity, and opportunities, being in the hands of people other than the man himself. It is emasculating for black men that their opportunities in employment and education are often unfairly limited by factors outside of their control. It is emasculating for Asian men that some nameless and faceless media types are able to define what it means to be an Asian man in an apparently arbitrary and defamatory way, that they have no control over.

This is a point that requires more consideration - the root of Asian male emasculation is the appropriation of our capacity to define ourselves within the context of our culture and society - everything else is secondary to that. For example, I view jokes about Asian men's dicks as emasculating because they represent the capacity and power of others to arbitrarily define and describe our bodies - the joke itself is meaningless. It, and every other derogatory stereotypes are merely symptoms of the problem, and not the problem itself. Just like rape is considered less about sex and more about asserting power, emasculation is fundamentally the capacity to assert arbitrary power over other men.

This is why personal choice is all important in the struggle against emasculation. It is, therefore, ironic that a blog post that seeks to promote "healthier" conceptions of male masculinity, seeks to do so by controlling and limiting some self-definitions and choices simply because we don't like it. Even worse, is the irrational fear that such hyper-sexual masculinity when skewed could lead to more Elliot Rodgers, when the fact is that any masculine quality (any human quality, in fact) can lead to tragic events when we abuse them.

What About Us?

Well.....What About You?

It is somewhat amazing that in the two years or so since Wesley Yang wrote his piece for the New York magazine and I'm still deriving so much rich material from it to post about! Perhaps it is the general dearth of Asian men being given opportunities to voice strong opinions in mainstream outlets that may explain my continued revisiting of the one that stands out the most.

My original opinions on Yang's piece were critical, but I noticed an interesting phenomenon in some other responses to his piece - the fact that he had actually chosen to focus on Asian men seemed to be a source of criticism. Despite all the issues that I had with Yang's piece, the one positive that I took from his piece was that he had focused on Asian-American men. I don't think he should have been criticized for that - although I did not agree with much of what he wrote, the fact that he chose to focus specifically on Asian men is in and of itself not a good reason to criticize his piece. But some critiques seemed to find Yang's Asian-male-centric focus to be problematic.

A response piece written in Slate magazine by Nina Shen Rastogi at the time offered some valid criticisms of Yang's piece, and then threw in this somewhat leading remark in the second paragraph...

As the accompanying  Yang, recent college grad Jefferson Mao, restaurateur Eddie Huang, and "pickup artist" J.T. Tran make clear, this essay gazes up at that woody canopy from a decidedly male perspective. The 9,000-word piece profiles several young Asian-American men but there is only one woman — a marketer for IBM — who emerges as anything near a character, though she's far less vividly drawn than any of the males. What's more, male sexual inadequacy is a consistent theme in Yang's lament: Failing to master the nuances of American masculinity is portrayed as a key part of the Asian-American experience. (On the question of where that leaves us Asian-American women, Yang is silent.)

The fact that the above comment occurs in the second paragraph might suggest how important it was to Rastogi to point out that Asian women did not feature in Yang's piece. To me this is a bizarre and perhaps, petty, criticism; Yang's piece is about the Asian male experience, and that is worthy of focus and attention in and of itself without having to be all-inclusive. How mentioning Asian women in the piece might perhaps lend greater credibility is never explained by Rastogi.

The emboldened part of the criticism is especially perplexing. Asian men's masculinity issues - that is, America's cultural dehumanization of Asian men - is a key part of the Asian-American experience. Where that leaves Asian women is really up to Asian women to explain, and Rastogi would have done better to, perhaps, put forward her own ideas on this instead of offering pointless, insinuative criticisms that seem to be little more than discomfort that there exists an Asian male experience that need not require the presence of Asian women to give it validity. The fact is, Asian men have their own set of issues relating to race, or otherwise, that are deserving of their own space and opportunity for investigation and which is necessarily independent of Asian women's issues. Why this disturbs folks is beyond the scope of this piece to explain.

In another critique, which I found to be insightful overall, an Asian male blogger at a space called "Scattered Speculations" offers similar criticisms....

I ask this, following Vijay Prashad’s wonderful book The Karma of Brown Folk, because I think what Asian Americans (I hesitate to say “we” here) seem to constantly miss is how much discourses of “Asian American success” and “model minority” are used (not necessarily by us at first) for the reproduction of the American racial strata whose logic and raison d’etre is anti-Black, and largely sexist. (I need not remind you all the racist figures of “welfare queen” that began under Reagan and came to a boiling point in Bill Clinton. It is he who ended welfare after all.) And most importantly, how Asian American men benefit from this. More than anything, I’m troubled by Yang’s utter ignorance of this fact. There is no mention of African Americans or women. Hence, his piece is littered with stories about Asian American men’s inability to get what white men get—whether it be in the realm of college admissions, professional mobility, or white women. (It is on this last point that I find the non-mention of Asian American women, even just an aside, to be rather odd.)

The author of that blog - a dude named Sam Han - ups the ante in the above comment, calling Yang out for not mentioning African-Americans as well as women as, perhaps, being more harmed by the model minority stereotype and notions of Asian-American success. But, again, the implication is that Asian men's experiences don't have a legitimate claim for specific focus and that such issues are devalued without a wider context. This is like having your child repeatedly come home from school with a bloody nose, asking him or her to explain what happened and how he or she feels about it, but then criticizing the answer because they fail to mention how their bloody nose affects their classmates.

But even more problematic in the Han criticism is that it, ironically, fails to notice that many stereotypes bring benefits to varying degrees to those who are stereotyped based on one's position on the political spectrum. Asian women "benefit" from the stereotype of being passive and submissive (that is, "safe"), by being more readily accepted - at least as media figures - than Asian men, and perhaps even more so than black women. African-Americans benefit from America's suspicion of Asians by being more associated with being "American" - that is, black loyalties are rarely questioned.

Worst of all, Han's criticism implies that Asians are somehow required to answer for stereotypes that they had no role in creating. I don't think that we are required to answer for stereotypes that others create about us, especially when - as I pointed out here - it is questionable the actual degree to which the model minority stereotype actually informs government social policies, and it is mostly Asians themselves who seem to be the one's most likely to talk about it these days. More importantly, the model minority myth hurts Asians more than anyone else - a fact that gets lost in our drive to perform damage control the effects on other groups of a stereotypes that we did not create. No, it is ridiculous to insist that a discussion on the specific issues that affect Asian men should have an "all-inclusive" element. The subject is worthy of attention in and of itself, without the need to apologize for its existence.

Although it may not be the intention of the two critics above, the result of such criticisms is that it insists that Asian men's issues (and, strangely, by extension all Asian issues) are more credible or even valid only if they don't somehow only focus on Asian men. This is tantamount to saying that the Asian male voice cannot speak on its own behalf specifically, but must highlight related issues along the way. If we were to follow this policy, it would mean that Asians can have no credible autonomous voice, and that Asian men's issues are only valid relative to the issues of other oppressed groups. That is a dangerous way of thinking. Albeit unintentional, this way of thinking is actually a classic Red Herring type approach that is usually used by those opposed to any minority voice.

Occasionally, the apparent drive to tamper with and temper the Asian male experience manifests in snide ways. In an article from earlier in the year, Slate writer, Anne Ishii, offers a somewhat eye-rollingly derisive review of a biography called "Fresh Off The Boat" by Asian-American provocateur (of sorts), Eddie Huang. Ishii's review seems to go a step further and instead of insisting that there be no focus on Asian men, she seems to haughtily find the whole process of Asian men blindly sorting their way through pervasive racist stereotypes to be distasteful - who do Asian men they think they are, indeed?! In fact, it is almost as though Ishii is embarrassed that Huang has a racialized masculinity - as though it is his fault - and she is somehow losing face because of it.

In short, Asian men's stories - just like any other demographic - are significant in their own right without having to be vehicles for other oppressed groups. Yes, there is a time and place for that kind of crossover work, but given the dearth of Asian men's points of view in the mainstream, it seems petty (and repressive) for people to insist that what little time we are afforded to present a specific Asian male perspective must be shared with others who may, in fact, already possess greater opportunities and avenues to recount their experiences than Asian men could even hope for.

For all of the criticisms that have been levelled at Wesley Yang's piece, the most unexpected (and pointless) is that he was somehow at fault because he focused on issues specifically from the perspective of Asian men. Criticizing this further marginalizes Asian men, and represses their opportunities to have an autonomous voice within American culture.

What Would You Do?

....Marginalizing Asian Men In The Fight Against Racism.

In a previous post wrote about an incident in Korea in which a couple of western ex-pats made a video of themselves harassing and abusing a Korean woman in a nightclub. It has since come to light that the video is most likely staged by actors, but that, in no way, changes the gist or points that I made in the original post, about the way that the incident was reported and how it seemed to deflect  responsibility back onto Koreans themselves. With that in mind, at the end of the Washington Post article was this paragraph.......

It’s not clear that the woman in this video was seeking out Western men — if anything, it looks like she was minding her own business when they set upon her — but it’s difficult to imagine what it must be like for other Korean women who see the video online. First they watch the young woman being harassed by two Western men, pushing her around like a disobedient animal, then they see her scolded on Korean social media and Web discussion boards, told by Korean men that she deserved what she got. The moment when she stands up and brushes off her assailants — with no help from anyone in the bar, it’s difficult to miss — is the closest this story gets to having a hero.

It is the final sentence that piques my interest;

"the woman brushed off her assailants, without help from anyone in the bar."

Thinking about what I would have done - that is, questioning whether I would have "helped" -  if I had witnessed this situation made me realize the depth of the divide between Asian men and women in America. I will be honest and say that I second-guessed myself about a situation which if it had involved any other demographic, I would likely have been far more certain about what I would have thought of as the "right" thing to do.

In light of previous posts that I have written, that deal with the dating choices of Asian women, specifically with regards to the degree to which some seem willing to overlook racialization or trivialize anti-Asian racism, this question of "would I have helped", requires a complicated answer. The two posts linked to above, in addition to other commentaries by Asian women seem to make it clear that some Asian women (with access to publications that can mainstream their bizarre ideas) view white racism and the struggle against it drastically differently than Asian men view it.

It has been plainly stated by some Asian women in mainstream and non-mainstream publications alike, that racism and demeaning racist behaviour are not necessarily grounds to reject romantic advances which, effectively, leaves anyone hoping to make a stand against it on shaky ground. Some Asian women seem to actually welcome anti-Asian racism as an opportunity to further territorialize the fight against it and expound on their views of Asian men as disruptors of the dating choice. For others, as in the case of the Jen An piece, the implication is that Asian women can overlook racism by adopting racist attitudes themselves and finding dating joy.

Here is the dilemma; for any Asian-American to "help" in a situation like the one portrayed in the video (where the Korean girl is being abused), one would have to consider this aspect of the situation. To me, this illustrates how making light of anti-Asian racism, or even racial slurs has damaged the credibility of Asian-American claims of prejudice - if Asians themselves present an ambivalent attitude to racism, and are even willing to forgive (or participate in) racism for the sake of a date or financial reward, then mainstream America cannot in all fairness be faulted for any ambivalence towards anti-Asian racism.

On a deeper level, these types of accounts and the resulting ambivalence, and casual dismissal of anti-Asian racism, that it creates, is simply another aspect of the process of feminization of the Asian-American voice. By creating this ambivalence, the masculine aspect of Asian resistance to racism is confounded and pacified - that is it becomes feminized in the worst possible way; the passive and co-dependent "I can change these men" way. So what would have been the "right" thing to do? I still don't really know because the way that some Asians themselves mainstream their ideas about racism, renders any notions of what is "right" into a far more ambivalent place than it might be reasonable. Seemingly there are some Asian women who accept a racist partner in the same way that they might accept a messy one - as little more than an annoyance.

At the end of the day, I think that we, as Asian men, are required to address this kind of racism - even when (perhaps, especially when) it might be unwelcomed as interfering in someone else's dating opportunities. The reason is that non-one - not even Asians themselves - has the right to tell us that there is "acceptable" racism. Most importantly, we are attacking this racism not on behalf of Asian women but for ourselves. Asian women are free to overlook or participate in anti-Asian racism if they want, but that doesn't mean that we have to accept it when they allow it to become a normalized, mainstream narrative.

"Asian Girlz" Video Is Racist and Sexist.......

....But Asian Men Are Bastards.

I came across an interesting blog post by an Asian feminist blogger, called Esther Choi, at blog called "stabra", which I thought had moments of insight, but which seemed to ultimately and with great irony fall victim to its own white supremacist presumptions. The boldly entitled piece "ending white supremacy does not begin with controlling asian women's decisions", left me with high expectations which were, sadly, dashed moments later in the sub-headings. The article goes on immediately to uphold the tactics of white supremacy by generalizing culpability to an entire group by addressing the piece to "straight Asian men".

A part of me really wanted to believe that this might simply be a rhetorical tool to provoke discussion which would be backed up by an article rich in thought-provoking points. But it was difficult for me to take the article seriously when there was clearly prejudicial thinking implicit in the premise; straight Asian men as a group are culpable of controlling women's choices. It may be true that ending white supremacy does not begin by controlling Asian women's choices, but I'm pretty sure that it also doesn't begin by pointing an accusatory finger at an entire group, strongly implying culpability and guilt. In fact, that is known as bigotry, and in this case it is also racist.

So right off the bat, Choi has used racism as an implicit premise for her points. But even more intellectually problematic, is the fact that Choi never actually specifies or shows why controlling Asian women's decisions is not an important part of the fight against white supremacy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Asian guys should control Asian women's choices, I'm saying that Choi never shows why doing so would hamper the fight against white supremacy. In fact, history is full of examples of self-sacrifice, of people controlling members of their own group in order to attain a commonly accepted goal that serves the greater good of that community.

It may well be that ending white supremacy may, in fact, require submission of Asian women's decisions to Asian men (haha) - just as some black feminists say that they allowed their voice to be put on the back-burner in order to support the greater good of the civil rights movement - I honestly don't know, but I'm not the one claiming to know. Choi doesn't know either, but she does know that "straight Asian men" are to blame, regardless. Choi's confusion becomes even more apparent once we get into the sparse meat of the article. Having pointed the finger at all straight Asian men, it turns out - ironically - that white racism has prompted this latest lashing out against Asian men.

The article begins with a reference to the, now infamous, Day Above Ground song "Asian Girlz". Describing the song and its accompanying video as "violently anti-Asian, sexist and all-around stupid", she goes on to write how the outcry by a feminist group who mobilized protests, led to the.....

"interruption of racist violence was only one example of the powerful vigilance and solidarity of Asian American women against issues of hypersexualization and objectification that damage our lives."

On a side note, I'm not against strong language to condemn racism, but is it accurate to label the song's racism as an act of "violence"? Or is that just crying wolf? The problem is that violence against women is a real issue, that is, real violence is a real problem which, to me, makes this characterization of the song seem like an overly-dramatic exaggeration that trivializes the concept of violence against women. But that isn't all. According to Choi.........

"It was the transnational feminist organization, AF3IRM, who initiated a swift response and mobilized protest on various fronts, which led to the band losing gigs and sponsorship. "

That may be true - or not, I have no way of confirming this - but the bandmembers posted the following statement on their YouTube channel part of which read....

This video is intended to be a satirical, provocative, absurd, & even silly work of art. The lyrics, story, and visuals are so completely over-the-top and ridiculous that we thought it'd be impossible to miss the point........But some very vocal groups, especially the blog, "Angry Asian Men [sic.]," attacked it right out of the gate very aggressively. Their fury was soon amplified by the blog/news cycle. Shortly after, the views and craziness began climbing by the second.........Angry Asian Men, to you we say - all's fair so well done! We salute you. Seriously. No satire intended this time.

Aside from the band's smarmy deference to the aggrieved groups, one thing stands out; the only Asian voice they mention is that of an Asian man - specifically the blog of Angry Asian Man, who, as far as I know, is straight. How awkward. The only Asian voice of dissent against the sexism and racism of the song singled out by the band belonged to a straight Asian man - bastard! Is the very straight AngryAsianMan also trying to control Asian women's choices too? After all, he is straight, male, and Asian.

While Asian men should speak out when it comes to racist and sexist incidents like the Asian Girlz video because their identities are affected as well, the way straight Asian men have most vocally chosen to approach the fetishization of Asian women has been in a manner that further marginalizes and oppresses Asian women..........Straight Asian males often respond to racism affecting Asian women’s bodies and sexualities as proxies for their own issues.

This is an interesting point because it shows the gulf that exists in how some Asian men and women conceive of what drives the other. First of all, there she goes again with that "straight Asian male" accusation, but more importantly, what exactly is meant by "proxy for their own issues" is key here. She seems to be saying - and criticizing - that internalizing racism that is experienced by others of the same group is somehow unnatural or incorrect. The problem is that this seems to be the most natural thing in the world and its called empathy and happens to be a very human and humane quality. It's why white civil rights activists in the 1960's were willing to risk their lives for black rights - perhaps they viewed the absence of rights for blacks as a proxy for their own issues, and felt empathy and compassion? Choi seems to be critical of this

That aside, it is ungenerous in the extreme - but to be expected in an article that accuses all straight Asian men - to suggest that Asian men are reacting to racism against Asian women basically out of self-interest. I believe that Asian men are capable of higher thinking and even have complex emotional inner lives, which means that Asian men may be responding to racism against Asian women for any myriad number of reasons. Some of it may be self-interest, some of it could be empathy and a sense of a common experience, some of it could be an ideological aversion to bigotry, some of it could be a sense of moral outrage, some of it could be opposition to any kind of bullying or injustice. The list of possible motives that drive Asian men's reactions to racism are probably large and far more complicated and nuanced than Choi seems to understand - but unfortunately, in America it is easy and normal to "paraphrase" the drives and motivations of Asian men into a simplistic and often negative caricature (as modeled by the culture of white supremacy), and this is the approach that Choi has taken.

But, perhaps most problematic of all for Choi's contention that "the way straight Asian men have most vocally chosen to approach the fetishization of Asian women has been in a manner that further marginalizes and oppresses Asian women", is that her article never establishes this as a fact. Do most Asian male commentaries on the fetishization of Asian women further "oppress" them? I don't truly know, but I've read enough commentaries to know that there are many straight Asian men who approach that issue without rancour towards Asian women, so much so that I question the accuracy of the claim. If there is a majority of Asian men doing this, then fair enough, but my observation is that those who attack Asian women because of "their choices" aren't actually taken that seriously by the rest of community, male or female.

Choi continues.....

In response to the emasculation of Asian men implied by the fetishization of Asian women, the solution appears to be to reclaim what seems to have been taken from them—power over women, especially Asian women—and this usually involves attacking Asian women for their decisions regarding their sex lives.....But the oppression of Asian men is not created by the decisions of Asian women. It is created by a white supremacist system that is very much designed to make them feel impotent. 

This is a classic bait and switch, and horribly un-nuanced. Choi is segueing Asian-America's favourite subject - interracial dating(!) - into the discussion. Uh-oh.

In response to the Asian Girlz video, popular Korean American comedian David So explicitly states that he is more concerned with Levy Tran’s choice to be in the video than the actions of white dudes, whose racist behavior he can expect. In his efforts to respond to anti-Asian racism, he launches into an extremely misogynistic attack against Levy Tran that further demeans and sexualizes her, and goes so far as to criticize her for participating in sexism while calling her a bitch in the same breath.

This is where the article becomes all muddled. What are we talking about here, Asian women's sex-lives (which some Asian women seem happy to make the subject of public debate, so it lacks credibility to cry foul when people do actually chime in with an opinion), or the response to the Asian Girlz video - which, incidentally, received a single sentence condemnation, compared to the entire article faulting Asisn men? The two are clearly separate issues. Whilst I agree that Asian women's dating choices are irrelevant to Asian male empowerment, I also think that we are obliged to speak out when Asian-American men or women make free choices to participate in any production or activity that is racially demeaning. This is one choice that all Asian-Americans should try to control in others.

The Asian Girlz song and video is completely unambiguous; that is, it is a stretch to claim that the lyrics and imagery are not utilizing racial stereotypes and racial language in a demeaning way. Unless  the girl involved in the video did not see or hear the lyrics, then she knowingly participated in a production that demeaned Asians and Asian women. That doesn't make her a victim of racism - as Choi wants to believe - that makes her a willing participant in its expression. It is unrealistic to suggest that there was coercion or a lack of choice, and that she participated because there was simply no other avenue available.Granted, the David So video does use off-colour language. Choi describes it thus.....

In his efforts to respond to anti-Asian racism, he launches into an extremely misogynistic attack against Levy Tran that further demeans and sexualizes her, and goes so far as to criticize her for participating in sexism while calling her a bitch in the same breath.

While it is true that So sexualizes the girl, there is a context to the video that goes unacknowledged. David So also refers to the white band members as bitches, and the Asian band member as a bitch, and is scathing about his role also. In fact, a little research would show that So uses vulgarity in many of his videos, and uses the term "be-atch" in many of his videos. While it is true that the Asian-American gender dynamic sometimes does devolve into vulgar online insult fests, I think it ungenerous to ignore the context of So's video work. Objectively, So's work seems to have adopted hip-hop culture that uses vulgar delivery in a way that isn't particular to his dialogue on Asian women. What can be said about David So, is that he uses a form of comic expression derived from a cultural art form which some may consider immature and unsophisticated. In short, Choi is making a mountain out of a molehill - at worst perhaps his video is annoying, and terribly unsophisticated but that's it.

Furthermore, Asian actors and artists of both sexes come under fire when they participate in productions that Asian-Americans may deem to be demeaning - it's not just Asian women who come under, sometimes vulgar, verbal assault for doing this. Gedde Watanabe and Ken Jeong spring to mind as male performers who have been sometimes viciously verbally attacked by Asian-Americans for taking roles deemed to be racially derogatory, so I don't believe that there is any special vitriol reserved particularly for female Asian performers. Is it right or fair? Not necessarily, but it is understandable, and surely it is more true to say that these kinds of responses are themselves a result of the frustrations stemming from the marginalization of Asian people, as opposed to attempts to coerce, abuse, or control others for its own sake? Choi continues.....

A related issue of great concern in the Asian blogosphere is that of Asian women dating white men. Both Asian American men and women have approached this issue by bemoaning the high level of “out-marriage” of Asian American women. However, considering Asians make up about 5% of the US population, this simply means that these women happened to find their partner from a pool of 95% of the population rather than 5%. When you put it that way, is it at all reasonable to conclude that Asian American women are doing something wrong?

The bait-and-switch is complete! In Asian-America, all roads lead to the interracial dating disparity and Asian women's dating choices - that is what Choi truly wants to talk about! But, okay, let's go there. I've made my views on the IR disparity clear - I personally couldn't care less about Asian women's dating choices, I think that notions of the degree of Asian male antagonism towards IR are exaggerated, and for those Asian guys who are vocal in opposition to it, I say move passed it. The only problem I have with IR is that it is often held up as evidence that anti-Asian racism doesn't exist, or that IR is responsible for its abatement, and there is a general tendency to exaggerate its social, historical and cultural significance.

Despite this, the fact remains that so many Asian women wanting to date specifically white men - and occasionally spouting racist and sexist stereotypes about Asian men in the process as a justification - is an unusual phenomenon. My guess is that from an anthropological perspective, this is a very unique state of affairs - that the women from one demographic see more in common with men from a completely different demographic than with the men from their own. Saying that there is nothing unusual about this seems unrealistic. It is unusual! Is it wrong? Of course not, but it certainly is unusual.

That is why it is highly dishonest to not recognize this fact, and any discussion on Asian men's responses to the IR disparity is pointless without an acknowledgement that it seems grossly unfair to heap judgement over a situation that is so unusual that it has no historical precedent. For young Asian-American men growing up in a culture where there are no cultural role-models - save demeaning ones - and where the culture seems to have closed ranks against them (with Asian women seemingly on the inside), and where acculturation and socialization are hampered by stereotypes, it seems ungenerous, to say the least, to stigmatize Asian men for not having a better disposition about the phenomena of high out-dating/marriage rates, but even worst to suggest that there is something wrong with Asian men for struggling to deal with it. It is, after all, extremely unusual and without historical precedent.

Should Asian men attack Asian women who do this? NO! Should we be surprised and wonder about it? Of course - that is the only natural response to a phenomenon that is unique historically, anthropologically, sociologically, and culturally. Denying the uniqueness of the phenomenon is simply dishonest. Thinking about the issue in terms of right or wrong is unfair to the individuals who do make these choices - both Asian women and the (few) Asian men who may have a hard time coming to terms with it.

Here's Choi....

Whatever the case, it is never right, especially in a social justice context, to condemn people’s personal decisions simply by categorizing them in a “problematic” trend. Love and relationships are one of the most complicated and uncontrollable things about our lives, and no one would ever want this significant part of their existence to be vilified by a larger social phenomenon.

That's irony. All feelings are complicated, and sometimes (not always) uncontrollable - even those of the dreaded "straight Asian man" - yet, "straight Asian men" have definitely been categorized (in Choi's article, and elsewhere) as "problematic", even though it is feelings that most probably drive the choices of the few who are vulgar in their criticisms of Asian women. But thanks to the gross generalizations made of straight Asian men that American culture normalizes - and which Choi is happily oblivious to having utilized - the human side of the Asian male voice is denied, and replaced with unsympathetic intolerance. More Choi....

Due to this obsessive focus on Asian women’s relationships, we not only have to look out for the countless ways in which we are exploited, but we also have to defend against constant judgment about being the passive victims of Asian fetish or internalized racists whenever we simply interact with a white male, and alter our behavior accordingly.  

Choi likes exaggeration. Where and how does this "obsession" manifest? It certainly isn't amongst straight Asian male bloggers, most Asian male bloggers don't make Asian women's sacred dating choices the central focus of their observations. This obsession certainly doesn't seem to manifest in Asian male works of literature, film, art, or any other creative endeavour, and it doesn't manifest in politics. In fact, most straight Asian men who have something to say, seem to almost ignore Asian women's dating choices. A few ornery internet commenters (who also happen to be anonymous, which leaves open the possibility that some may not actually be Asian at all) don't really constitute an "obsession".

By contrast, it is Asian women themselves who, often via mainstream outlets, seem obsessively focused on their own dating choices. If you look at Asian-American women's cultural output, in fact, much of it seems driven by this one theme; Asian women and the white men who complete them. It is almost as though Asian women don't have much else to talk about, so they keep returning to the one subject that they know people will respond to. The only people "obsessed" with Asian women's dating choices and who always seem to be raising the subject are Asian women themselves - just as Choi does in her article, in fact.

But this brings me to another significant issue with Choi's piece that is missing. The only ugly aspect of Asian women's dating choices, and one which many Asian men respond to with ugliness, is that some Asian women actually justify their choices by racially stereotyping Asian men, often in an extremely ugly way. Even worse, this aspect of the issue is often played out through culture; for instance, it is not uncommon for the dating-choice-obsessed-Asian-female-cultural-output to caricature the Asian male characters in their work in the same manner demonstrated by white supremacy, funnily enough. This is another reason I avoid castigating and judging Asian men who do focus on the IR disparity - it is quite possible that some of them have had really ugly personal experiences with the kind of Asian girl that we all know plays a significant role in generating the ugliness in the issue, but about whom we never talk about; the nasty piece of work who makes it her business to attack Asian men (often with ugly racial stereotypes). So, I try to be little more empathetic, and non-judgemental.

As Choi says....

You won’t liberate yourselves as Asian men or reclaim your power by supporting American constructs of masculinity, or being the exception to the rule. The racist stereotypes that try to emasculate you never had anything to do with your actual behavior or your value as a man, and the stereotypes will hold no matter how often you defy them. Liberation begins by questioning and destroying the system that so violently excludes and dehumanizes you.

That is a strange thing to say in light of my previous few paragraphs. Some Asian women's obsession with dating white men - as evidenced by the vast cultural output of Asian women with this as a significant theme - itself largely excludes Asian men or only includes them as secondary caricatures of real human beings. These dating-choice-obsessed creative works by Asian women themselves support American constructs of masculinity and the culture that nırmalizes it. In fact, the Asian Girlz video upholds American constructs of masculinity - but Choi doesn't actually have much to say about the actual white supremacy of the Asian Girlz video, unfortunately, except to call it some names.

The main problem with Choi's piece is that she could not quite decide if she wanted it to be a screed, an advisory, a rant, or an opening for a meaningful dialogue, and because of this, it fails on all counts. This is a pity because she does make a few insightful points at various times of the piece, but it gets lost in the muddle. What is apparent, however, is that Choi, by failing to fairly consider every point of view in this issue, and her blanket presumption of straight Asian male culpability, has actually written a piece that diverts attention away from white supremacy and the behaviours that help to uphold it that exist even within the community.

Despite Choi's accusations of Asian male obsessiveness, the Asian feminine-driven culture that has developed around the dynamic of Asian women and white men, provides a strong indication that it is actually Asian women themselves who are obsessed with their own dating choices. Furthermore, Choi fails to recognize that this culture produced by some Asian-American women whose work seems preoccupied with white dudes, quite possibly does more to uphold the white supremacy that suppresses all Asians, than a few Asian guys on the internet who may be struggling to understand the significant historically and anthropologically unusual and unprecedented phenomenon of a demographic rejecting wholesale, men from their own community.

Most problematic for Choi's piece is that she utilizes similar strategies to those that uphold white supremacy - her blanket address to straight Asian men, amounts to little more than an accusation which implicitly renders all Asian men culpable for the actions of a very few. For a piece that ostensibly decries white supremacy, Choi has not been shy in applying white supremacist tactics in her article. Furthermore, in a remarkable twist of irony, Choi has used the oppression of white racism to justify her own racist presumptions. In much the same way that some expats have used feminism to justify anti-Asian racism, Choi seems to have used the language of oppression to justify a way of conceiving of Asian men that can only be described as ungenerously one-dimensional, and ultimately prejudiced.

These issues can be best illustrated through Choi's own words; she very kindly provides a list of suggestions (although the word "commandments" did come to mind), for how Asian men can support the struggle for dating empowerment. Here's number one....

Raise women’s voices. The conversation on the issues affecting Asian American women are being led by Asian American women in insightful, challenging ways. Here here and here are some more examples. We are neither helpless nor in need of male supervision. Our struggle against our own oppression as Asian women helps break down white supremacy and weakens its hold on every part of our lives, including our relationships, more than lectures from Asian men ever will. Supporting women’s voices on these issues breaks down the racist, sexist, homophobic stereotypes that oppress us all.

Choi has not provided any reason for me to believe that Asian men do not, or have not, supported Asian women's voices on these issues. In fact, I would say that there is every reason to believe that Asian men do support women's voices, both in cultural endeavours, and in social media. For every outspoken "angry Asian man", there has, in my experience, been many more Asian male voices that do not tolerate that type of approach. Choi simply has a skewed notion of Asian men that doesn't allow her to think of them in any way other than as an annoying mass of anonymous Asian faces out to disrupt her dating choices.

On a final note, it is interesting - and an entire post could be devoted to this - to notice that implied in Choi's piece, is the notion that Asian men have nothing to offer in the dialogue on sexist based anti-Asian racism, and that only Asian women can be in possession of the insights necessary to combat it. This both silly and dangerous. It is silly because all too often in life it is the person who is not directly involved in a given situation who is more able to see the bigger picture in ways not easily apparent to those "in the trenches". It may well be that the counter-foil of Asian men does hold the key to Asian female empowerment, or not, I'm just not prepared to dismiss Asian men's perspectives out of hand on any issue just because they are inconvenient. It is dangerous because by refusing the Asian male voice (and perhaps occasionally a dissenting or leading voice) in the dialogue, Choi is effectively removing the basis of community.