Friday, July 14, 2017

Exposing Posing.

The Road Less Travelled.

Well, it's been a few months since I last posted - life is keeping me busy! I hope to get back to regular blogging soon. Something caught my attention in recent weeks that I had to write about.

It seems that these days our cultural consciousness is driven by narratives - stories, and even myths that create, shape, and reinforce societal beliefs, opinions, and attitudes. Taken together, these narratives form the basis for our "commonly held beliefs" as a nation, society, or community, and often provide the framework through which policy is formed, actions are taken, and laws are made.

In America's race dialogue, narratives are a significant weapon in the arsenals of activists seeking justice for racial wrongdoings of both present and past. None are more verbally empowered by narratives than progressive Asian "activists" who have appropriated existing race narratives that define a racial dialogue almost exclusively along black/white lines with an occasional mention of Mexicans and Muslims thrown in for the sake of "diversity". Sadly, when it comes to an Asian-American narrative, Asian activism seems to be at a loss, particularly where Asian men are concerned.

The recent shooting of a 60-year-old grandfather, Jiangshen Chen, is a case in point. Chen was shot by a white security guard in the parking lot of an apartment complex, where his family owned a home, after he came under suspicion whilst playing Pokemon Go in his parked vehicle. According to reports, the white security guard fired through the window of Chen's vehicle, leaving the grandfather dead at the scene. Tragic, no doubt, yet, this incident lays bare the paucity of substance of Asian-American progressive activism.

If we cast our minds back several months to the shooting of Akai Gurley by Chinese-American police officer, Peter Liang, we might notice a radically different Asian activist reaction to that case than to the Chen shooting. Gurley's shooting was met with a prolonged effort of re-activism; in-depth social commentary that seemed to engage in long-distance, mass psychoanalysis of Liang and the immigrant Chinese community that supported him, condemning all as anti-black racists whose actions render them complicit in the preceding centuries of white supremacist racism that led to a killing that was supposedly anti-black in intent and scope. Every stage of the Gurley case seemed to be accompanied by Asian activism's commentary cheerleading for a guilty verdict of murder to be given to Liang.

For months, Asian commentary seemed to be dominated by the supposedly rampant (yet unsubstantiated) anti-blackness of Asia and its people that somehow (it was asserted) had a bearing on Liang's actions and the support he was receiving from his community. Liang was tried and convicted of guilt by Asian progressives who had no apparent first-hand information about the case, and whose knowledge of events came entirely from media reports - that is, the same media about whom we often complain is biased against Asian-Americans.

In short, Asian activists exhibited some of the most passionate, aggressive, and enduring acts of protest and commentary in their condemnation of Liang and his allegedly racist supporters. By comparison, Chen's shooting has been largely met with what seems like an awkwardly mute Asian liberal punditry. You will struggle to find significant commentary on Chen's shooting, and at best, you might find twitter rage. But that's about it with not a narrative in sight trying to explain the meaning of such a pointless killing.

In fact, I found one, and only one, in-depth blog commentary on the case over at the Reappropriate blog - a dispassionate piece in which one point stood out; the notion that Chen's killer may have been poorly trained, and that this had a bearing on the fatal outcome of the encounter. According to the piece, the security guard's poor training is a question being raised by those who are concerned about.

What piques my interest here is that in the Liang case, several NYPD officers testified that the firearms training that was given to Liang was extremely p the killingoor, implying that as a rookie cop with such poor training, he should not have been given the task of patrolling the notoriously crime-ridden and dangerous tower block where Gurley's killing took place. Strangely, but not surprisingly, this aspect of Liang's case was completely ignored by Asian progressive commentary.

As I wrote in previous posts, progressive  condemnation of Liang and his supporters was high on self-righteousness and had already convicted Liang of anti-black racism as the motive for his actions. Recall that Liang claims that, with pistol in hand, he entered the stairwell through a door that swung back and struck his hand as he became startled by a noise, setting off his firearm. The bullet from the firearm ricocheted of a wall and struck Gurley - who was standing in his doorway two stories above Liang and completely unsighted by him - in the heart. Liang did not even realize that he had killed someone with his "shot".

Simply, put, no progressive gave Liang the benefit of the doubt that Gurley's death was the result of an accidental, freakishly unfortunate shooting, all stemming from inexperience and poor training. By contrast, the only progressive who can be bothered to write in-depth about Chen's shooting, affords his killer the benefit of the possibility of "poor training" as an explanation for his actions. The problem is that Chen's killer fired multiple rounds into the driver's front and side windows in broad daylight and must have known exactly what he was doing. Liang fired one shot....that ricocheted off a wall.....that killed a man who was unsighted two stories above.....and this is racist intent? Surely, if Liang's intent was to kill, he, like Chen's killer, would have fired several rounds blindly into the dark stairwell above, instead of a solitary bullet?

The ease and aggressiveness with which Asian activism jumped on the bandwagon of condemnation of Liang in a campaign of misrepresentation all but convicting him of racially biased killing was disturbing to say the least. It is reasonable to expect that a primary purpose of Asian activism would be to provide nuance for all members of our community - in Liang's case, the opposite held true. Asian progressive activism merely asserted a racist motive for Liang and his supporters, and implied - against all reasonable evidence - that there was intent to kill Gurley....because he was black. Even worse, the only nuance that Asian progressive activism brings to the table in Chen's shooting actually favours his killer.

The Caucasian killer of  Jiangshen Chen has not come anywhere near to being vilified as a racist by Asian progressives in the same way they tried to convince us Liang was an anti-black one. Even the Reappropriate article merely "wonders" if there might have been a racist motive. It would be tragic if it wasn't so hilarious. The implication is that the racist narrative of wicked Asian men (like Liang) is readily adopted and propagated by Asian progressivism whilst the issue of culturally normalized violence towards Asian men is far from the agenda. This highlights the ambivalence that Asian progressives exhibit towards Asian men.

According to our "activists", Asian men are complicit in social injustices that disadvantage blacks, and are regularly the subject of scathing articles that condemn them and equate their career and educational choices with acts of white supremacy. Laughable as this is, this posture has become the prevailing Asian progressive narrative concerning Asian men; according to them, we are the problem, and sometimes, it seems, we are accorded a vicious condemnation that seems rarely aimed at the mainstream white establishment.

It's no surprise, then, that in two cases of unarmed, innocent men being shot, the Asian man who unintentionally and accidentally kills a black man receives more hate and condemnation than the white man who intentionally kills an elderly Asian man. The responses to the victims was even more disparate. For Gurley, a narrative kicked in that provided clueless Asian progressives with the means to grandstand on his behalf. For Chen..........we're still waiting. What is the progressive narrative for Asian men? 

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Surprised? Not Me!

Reaping the Harvest of Progressive Racism.

As readers might have noticed, I have been somewhat less busy on my blog in recent weeks and months. There is a reason for this that I will talk about in future posts, but for today, I want to talk about Steve Harvey.

Harvey got into hot water a while back for making racially charged comments about Asian men, joking that no one finds Asian men attractive, and seguing his bigotry into a joke about Chinese food (of course). While discussing a book called "How to Date a White Woman: A Practical Guide for Asian Men", Harvey chose to use the book's existence as a reason to be racist, and said the following....
"That's one page too!....'Excuse me, do you like Asian men?' No. 'Thank you.' How to Date a Black Woman: A Practical Guide [for] Asian Men. Same thing. 'You like Asian men?' I don't even like Chinese food. It don't stay with you no time... I don't eat what I can't pronounce." 
Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Harvey votes liberal and endorsed Hilary Clinton in the election, and even went so far as to compromise journalistic integrity by providing Clinton with a "cheat sheet" of questions (which included "suggested responses) before a live interview with her, so that, one presumes, she wouldn't be faced with uncomfortable questions that she might have difficulty answering. As a racist liberal, he is in good company.

In his endorsement of  Clinton, he grovelled thusly....
"She has fought for social justice, equality and policies that expand civil rights and economic opportunity out there........And I'm endorsing you as my candidate for President of the United States and I just think that you're going to just do the right thing for the majority of the people in this country."
Is it just me, or does there seem to be a culture of anti-Asianism amongst liberal African-American celebs who spout rhetoric about racial justice and equality, whilst simultaneously spouting off the cuff, throw-away, casual anti-Asian racism?

I'm also reminded of last year's Oscar's ceremony when we were treated to another racist joke aimed at Asian men in the form of a penis joke by Sacha Baron Cohen. We're accustomed to demeaning sit-coms, tweets, and films that denigrate Asian men, but liberal, live-broadcast, hit-and-run racial harassment of Asian men is something unusual. The question is, why the sudden boldness?

Disturbingly, this unapologetic, casual anti-Asian male racism expressed by liberals so happens to correlate with the emergence of the mainstreaming of Asian progressive/feminist antagonism towards Asian men. It's too early to assert that there is a pattern emerging here, but the correlation between bold and brazen mainstream anti-Asian male racism and ever more shrill Asian progressive attacks on Asian men in recent years is too coincidental to ignore. 

I have pointed out in previous posts that Asian progressive rhetoric that has targeted other Asians (notably elderly Asians and Asian immigrants) seems to have been adopted by conservatives as a means to argue against white racism (laughably ironic!), but also by liberals like Bill Maher to explain away liberal racism in the film industry. Asian progressive rage has also targeted Asian men in the tech industry (who are accused of racism because they work in tech), but also Asian men (like John Cho and Eddie Huang) who have actually managed to get a fingernail hold in industries that have traditionally excluded or marginalized them.

You don't have to look too hard or too far to find racist, Asian progressive rhetoric that demonizes and dehumanizes Asian men. In December of last year, anti-anti-blackness hero, Anil Dash, said the following during a panel discussion on "diversity" in tech....
The biggest inhibitor to increasing the number of black and Latino creators, Dash said, is Asian-Americans, “who turned our backs” on black and Latino communities after those communities welcomed Asian-Americans into their neighborhoods.
That's right, according to Dash, Asian men are interlopers who took advantage of inner-city hospitality and are now shitting on blacks and Latinos by working in tech. It doesn't get much more inflammatory than that. Dash's assertions are far more racist than Steve Harvey's and Sacha Baron Cohen's, yet, his words reflect the standard rhetoric of Asian progressivism. There is a long list of such rhetoric that targets Asian men with unsubstantiated accusations of complicity in white supremacy or anti-blackness merely because of the career they have chosen.

Asian progressive rhetoric has become a significant source that informs anti-Asian racism amongst both mainstream conservatives and liberals. Worse still, progressive attacks on Asians has enabled anti-Asian racism and helped to make it acceptable - how can you logically argue against stereotyping, demonization, and dehumanization of Asians in general, and Asian men in particular, when the most widely disseminated views issuing from Asian-America are "progressive" ones that do these very things? 

Thursday, December 22, 2016

President Trump...An Asian-American Nightmare.

The Demagogue Arises

Back in February of this year, I wrote a post about Donald Trump in which I noted a similarity in his proposal to end the H-1B program and the anti-Asian rhetoric of Asian-American progressives who advocate against high Asian representation in the tech industry. I have also pointed out in several previous posts how this same anti-Asian progressive rhetoric has apparently been adopted by several right-wing conservative (and the occasional liberal) media commentators to defend white society against the charge of racism. 

Now that Donald Trump has been elected to the presidency, I have the niggling feeling that the chickens are about to come home to roost on this anti-Asian sentiment propagated by Asian progressives in the liberal media.

It is worth remembering that in the early days of the election - as I pointed out here - sinophobia-tinged economic tough-talk gave rise to a number of xenophobic comments by politicians from all sides of the political spectrum. Trump even racially caricatured Asians with a mock "Asian" accent to the full enjoyment and applause of his gathered supporters and barely a head shake of disapproval from our "allies" on the left.

Noticeable about the election campaigning was that even though there was so much eye-winking and nudge-nudging anti-Asian rhetoric, this apparent widely-held xenophobia and the casual anti-Asian racism it reveals never became an election issue in the way that anti-Muslim, and anti-Hispanic immigration rhetoric became a significant talking point for those opposed to Trump. Our liberal allies seemed not too invested in championing anti-Asian racism as a political cause. The reason is that anti-Asian racism is so casually expressed and normative in our society that, likely, few in mainstream America thought that there was any issue at all.

I abstained from voting - and I wish that all vote-eligible Asian-Americans had expressly boycotted the election. The reason I did so is that as an Asian, I was visible only as a potential threat and fifth column to the right, and only as a joke, a threat, and possible fifth column by the left. While, the anti-Asian racism of the right needs little examination since, at least, they're open and honest about it, the left on the other hand is more slippery. All you have to do is consider some of Hilary Clinton's most celebrated supporters and you will see what I'm talking about.

When it comes to culturally influential and prominent supporters, she had people like Chris Rock, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna (and here), Shaq,and Rosie O'Donnell, to name a few. It would not be too much of an exaggeration to say that individually and collectively, even this limited sample of liberal/leftist wields significant influence in our culture and society. Merely by virtue of the platforms made available to these celebs, their statements on any issue have the potential to reach huge swathes of people and influence these viewers' attitudes. This is why electioneering politicians seek the support of such celebrities - they can reach hundreds of thousands of followers and spread political messages via already-established media platforms.

Chris Rock's racial stereotyping of Asians at the Oscars was viewed by tens of millions of people - worldwide - and was presented at an event held by a notoriously liberal and "progressive" Hollywood establishment in an atmosphere of casual acceptance of its racist content, followed up by non-committal, sniggering media reporting on the subject. All of these celebs have significant followings and at various times in their careers have served as role models and leaders for thousands of fans, which means that they role-modeled casual anti-Asian racism to untold numbers of people.

The liberal left's tolerance of anti-Asian racism and its unqualified acceptance of high-profile liberal supporters who casually voice such sentiment showed America that progressive Democrats' self-righteous moral posturing on race was a farce. It all boils down to simple logic. If the pursuit of racial equality and upholding of the dignity of minorities are universal principles, then, by definition, these principles must be applied to all minorities. As I have shown, high-profile supporters of the liberal left routinely propagate stereotypes of Asians and spout anti-Asian racism, but are still proudly paraded by liberal politicians as upholders of universal principles of racial justice and equality.

That means that as an Asian-American, I am being asked by Asian progressive activists to support a party that seeks out the vote-winning power of celebs who unapologetically expressed racial bigotry towards me, and who represent an industry that routinely excludes Asians from participating in it. Donald Trump and his ilk are the devils we know. Liberal leftists are the devil in disguise, pretending to uphold universal principles while at the same time welcoming supporters who role-model and promote anti-Asian racism.

It is disturbing to realize that our society's indifference to Donald Trump racial mockery of Asians is fostered by the liberal media and some of the celebs who utilize its platforms. Indeed, the liberal media - through whitewashing dramatic roles, stereotyping, and discrimination against Asian actors - is the primary culprit in normalizing anti-Asian racism. Trump's racial mockery did not become a major election issue because our society is conditioned to view racist stereotypes as the normal way of conceiving of Asians, and the left could not mobilize behind an opposition to anti-Asian prejudice because it is supporters of the left that have done so much to normalize it. The liberal media created the social conditions that made Trump's anti-Asian racism a non-issue.

From an Asian-American point of view, there really is no good choice in American politics - liberals, the team that champions racial justice - propagate racist stereotypes of Asians, whilst Trump and many of his supporters simply don't like Asians and are honest about it. We know what to expect from them. The liberals, on the other hand, don't seem to like Asians much either, but they are not honest about it.

The repercussions of this liberal normalization of anti-Asianism under a Trump presidency remains to be seen. But, what is clear is that if Trump decides to go full on with a belligerent anti-China policy, then thanks to liberals - especially Asian progressives with their smearing of their own community - we can expect to continue to see any acts of anti-Asian racism met with an indifferent shrug, regardless of its severity. 

Friday, October 7, 2016

Much Wu Wu About Nothing....

Constance Keeps It Constant....

There was a YOMYOMF post recently that sought to defend Constance Wu from accusations of hypocrisy after she tweeted criticism of the casting of Matt Damon in a historical film set in ancient China. As readers might know, Damon is Caucasian and very much un-Chinese - making his starring role in a film set in this period of ancient Chinese history somewhat anachronistic. So, Wu's comments are on point.

The criticism of Wu came from - according to the YOMYOMF article - Asian men who, apparently, consider her a hypocrite because she criticizes white racism yet, she is dating a white man.

This is the significant piece of what she said, but you can read the full tweet here.....
We have to stop perpetuating the racist myth that [only a] white man can save the world.........Our heroes don't look like Matt Damon. They look like Malala. Ghandi. Mandela. Your big sister when she stood up for you to those bullies that one time.
The YOMYOMF article links to this Hapa Reddit thread as its primary example of Asian men shitting on Wu. I have a couple of things to say about this whole shitfest.

Firstly, to cite a Hapa reddit thread and then throw out the accusation that it is "Asian men" who constitute most of the critics is one conflating bridge too far. If you read through the Hapa Reddit site, you will notice that a good amount of it is devoted to criticism of Asian female and white male relationships. As the offspring of mixed marriages/relationships who most likely are drawing from personal (often painful, apparently) experiences in their criticisms of their own backgrounds, to dismiss them as "Asian male trolls", is insulting to their life experiences as mixed-race people who have a unique perspective on the racial dynamics of mixed-race partnerships. At the very least, they are owed - as human beings - the decency of having their experiences not dismissed out of hand merely because it makes progressives uncomfortable.

It doesn't help that the Hapa Reddit thread criticizing Wu dates from 11th June 2016, whilst Wu's tweet was published on 29th of July - so the Reddit thread is not actually criticizing her specifically for her tweet.

The second issue relates to what Constance Wu actually said in her tweet and whether it warrants the kind of orgasmic excitement displayed by many in the Asian-American activist blogosphere. Firstly, I don't agree that Wu is being a hypocrite or inconsistent by having a white boyfriend. And neither do I think she deserves to be insulted because of this.

At the same time, her words...
We have to stop perpetuating the racist myth that [only a] white man can save the world....
...weakened her case and left her open to criticism. Let's be honest, the high rate of out-marriage amongst Asian women (particularly to white men) also, in its own way, perpetuates a racist myth of Asian men made undesirable by their misogyny. There's no getting away from this fact. But this is not why I'm not particularly inspired by Wu's tweet.

In essence, Wu's comment follows the worn and weary path of recent fashionable Asian-American activism. She takes an issue of specific anti-Asian bias and uses it as a springboard to wax poetic about a general issue of bias in which the specificity and unique issue of Asian cultural invisibility becomes secondary. She doesn't even use the word "Asian", and the word "Chinese" crops up only in relation to the film's investors. In effect, Wu has herself rendered Asians - that is, East and South-East Asians - somewhat invisible.

Even the people that Wu puts forward as our heroes - Malala, Ghandi, and Mandela - don't actually look like me or my ilk. Doesn't she have heroes who look East or South East Asian? If she can't think of any such people, then that in and of itself speaks to a need for activism that focuses on us, and not some wild, pompous, big tit in the sky approach that is inclusive of everyone but satisfies no one and renders me invisible. The content of Wu's tweet is not even particularly unique or original - these sentiments have been, and continue to be, voiced by anonymous Asians on countless forums and blogs.

So, while it is good that these ideas are being voiced by a high profile figure in the public arena, there's nothing new being said, and the way it is being said actually renders me invisible. The crux of the problem is that Asian-American activist thinking has become so one-dimensionally focused on "coalition" building that it has become one of the major forces marginalizing Asians - Constance Wu's tweet illustrates this as clear as day.

While there is grandstanding about "building coalition" with other minorities, the all-important foundation of an Asian-American coalition seems largely neglected. There seems to be a lack of cohesiveness and understanding between the various ethnic Asian groups, between generations, genders, sexualities and social classes. The dis-unity of Asian-America is even exacerbated by the anti-Asian racist rhetoric of Asian progressivism that characterizes Asian men as toxic, Chinese FOBs as rampant anti-black racists, and any Asian man who works in the tech industry as an implicit supporter of white supremacy.

Constance Wu, in a subsequent moment of activist zealotry was kind enough to illustrate this division for us in another tweet where she seemed to voice support for a mail-order bride "sitcom" that was being considered by media racists. As a privileged woman of North-East Asian descent, living in the wealthiest country in the world, Wu seems to be out of touch with Asian women in the less prosperous countries of Asia who, perhaps, are more vulnerable to exploitation.

In short, there really is not much to see here. Constance Wu's sentiments meet the required standards of present-day Asian activism in that it utilizes an instance of specific anti-Asian bias to promote an agenda that results in more invisibility for Asians. There's nothing inspirational about that, regardless of who Wu is dating.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Are White Guys Are Too Dreamy To Be Held Accountable?

Xin Xin Liu Who?!

It's a funny old world.

In my previous post, I wrote about the twitter, attention-seeking "townhall" in which Asian progressive feminists used actor, John Cho's, concerns about the mental and emotional welfare of his child as an excuse to cast sexist and racist aspersions on Asian men in general and to demean - like any good white racist would do - the masculinity of Asian men who happen to not conform to the limits placed on them by society or wannabe Asian progressives with Napolean complexes.

An article posted to the YOMYOMF website recently by Erin Chew highlights why some Asian men find it hard to take these progressives seriously. The post recounted the story of the brutal murder over in Scotland of a Chinese woman, Xin Xin Liu, by her white Scottish husband, Rob Kerr. The victim was stabbed seventy-six times as the couple's children slept nearby. Interestingly, the article's focus was not on the crime and the issue of domestic violence faced by Asian women, but rather it focused on the poor taste of internet comment(s) made by a handful of Asian men.

As the title of the post suggests, Chew wanted to make it clear that she feels that the race of the murderer had nothing to do with the killing and that to make that association is absolutely despicable! Strangely enough, I would agree that we should not associate the race of criminals with their crimes, nor should we try to blame a person's race for any behaviours whether criminal in  nature or not. To do so is racist by any definition.

Strange then, that this is exactly what Asian progressives and Asian progressive feminists did in their recent hatchet job on John Cho and the subsequent two-minutes hate-type screeds in their twitter "townhall." But even before that most recent embarrassing display of stupidity, Asian progressive feminists have been routinely associating the behaviour of some Asian men who have committed crimes, or whom they simply do not like, with their race.

Most notably, Eliot Roger, Daniel Holztclaw, and Eddie Huang have all been held up as examples of some kind of toxic "Asian" masculinity, even though no one ever has the presence of mind to define what they mean by "Asian." Of course, readers will remember that Roger was a mass murderer, and Holztclaw was a serial rapist. Huang is a celebrity chef and successful (very successful!) author and television personality. How these two extremes of men could ever be seen as having a common unhealthy masculinity is beyond me. How their "Asian-ness" plays into the equation is also never explained by progressives.

As I've written in several previous posts, Asian progressive activism seems to function primarily as a defender of white supremacy. In almost every case of police killings of unarmed black men, or other instances of anti-black racism perpetrated by white institutions or people, Asian progressives will step up without fail to divert the conversation away from white racism and "reframe" the issues by attacking other Asians with vague accusations of rampant racism, privilege and "complicity" in anti-blackness.

White America seems to have taken notice of this strategy and actually seems to be utilizing this same method of deflection to defend white racism. "Asian privilege" is used to diminish accusations of anti-black racism in white America, and ideas of alleged Asian complicity and rampant anti-blackness have been used to shift responsibility for America's racial problems onto Asians. With this in mind, the stark contrast between the twitter townhall's racialization of toxic masculinity and Erin Chew's heartfelt defense of the whiteness of a brutal murderer are quite stunning.

When Eliot Roger committed his crimes, some Asian feminists tried to force his actions into a convenient narrative of it being an example of a mentality of "Asian" masculinity gone awry, despite the fact that Roger reserved his most vicious attacks for his Asian male victims. As for Holztclaw, I've seen no evidence or even the slightest indication that his race, or his feelings about his race had any bearing on his actions. Yet, Asian feminism wants to hold him up as the poster boy for the threat that Asian masculinity presents to American society. This thinking comes straight out of the Yellow Peril xenophobia playbook and has its roots deep in America's anxiety about mass immigration of Asian men into the country and the threat of miscegenation that accompanied it.

By comparison, Erin Chew's piece on YOMYOMF seems to go out if its way to avoid the kind of racist thinking commonly utilized by Asian progressives when speaking about Asian men. Her piece could be a great example of how not to racialize issues of domestic, or male on female, violence if it did not contrast so sharply with the general racist attitudes exhibited by the rest of the movement. Sadly, her piece reads like an apology for white violence against Asians, a defence of domestic violence, and a double standard in how violence against Asian women is viewed.

First of all, what is most noticeable is that the Scottish guy's mental health is used to defend his actions. Eliot Roger was possibly even more mentally ill than this Scottish guy - at least his mental illness was almost certainly more long-term - yet his mental state was largely played down by Asian progressive feminists who chose to focus on only the Asian part of his identity just so that they could use his actions to push their narrative of Asian misogyny as if genetics plays a part in cultural concepts of masculine behaviour.

Anyone who values the lives of women would be appalled by how the victim described in Chew's piece is rendered invisible by her focus on defending the whiteness of the Scottish dude. In fact, her worst condemnation is reserved for the Asian men who made insensitive comments on the web.
These Asian men sadly, are brainwashed, angry and have their own insecurities to deal with. Instead of acknowledging that this was a horrific case of domestic violence ending in death and sympathising for the deceased and the children, they have gone to victim blaming and calling Xin Xin “self hating” to marry a white guy. I wish that these type of Asian men look at the actual issue at hand that this is a fatal murder of a wife in a frenzied attack by her husband instead of blaming Xin Xin just because she married a white guy. 
If Chew had done a little more research, she would have found that in recent years, a series of incidences, including violent murders of Asian men and women in Scotland has been met with an often apathetic response by police investigators, and that the framing of the murder by the British media as a case of a "good (white) man acting in opposition of his normally good character" is a classic means to refocus attention away from the victim - particularly in cases where the victim is a minority. The judge in the Vincent Chin murder case made similar statements about the good character of his killers before ultimately showing leniency towards them. Furthermore, both Kerr's legal defence and the media have run with this same story of a "good" man acting out of character, whilst almost ignoring the Asian victim.

A violent murder of Simon San, a Chinese restaurant delivery driver, several years ago is a good example of how some murders of Asian people in Scotland are treated. Although the assailants screamed racial abuse at the victim as they beat him to death, police refused to investigate the murder as a hate crime. Even though the murderer was convicted, he was due to be released a mere three years into his sentence despite posting anti-Chinese comments on a Facebook page while still in prison. Police did acknowledge their failures with an apology, but that did not prevent the officer who made the decision not to charge the murderer with a hate crime from being promoted.

Other instances of racism hint at the existence of a culture of anti-Asian prejudice that informs police complicity in seeking lenient charges for murderers,and affects Asians in every strata of Scottish society. Last year, a Chinese origin politician in the Scottish National Party resigned amidst allegations of racial abuse and bullying. Even main opposition British Labour Party (which has huge support in Scotland) leader Jeremy Corbyn has been alleged to have utilized anti-Chinese sentiment. A report by Min Quan from 2009 exploring widespread anti-Chinese racism in the UK, details prolonged racial harassment and abuse of Chinese-Brits, violent attacks and verbal abuse (even on children).

Although some victims report good experiences with police responses to anti-Chinese crimes, many others report apathy, indifference, and an unwillingness of police to pursue any in-depth investigation. Even worse, there is an implication of police obstruction of justice in cases where police advice to victims resulted in cases being dropped.

This background gives the savage stabbing of Xin Xin Liu by her white Scottish husband a whole different context that makes Erin Chew's defence of his whiteness seem even more hollow, particularly when we consider how justice for his Chinese victim might be administered. Already, the media, like Chew, is upholding the integrity of the savage killer. His whiteness remains unsullied by his actions, even though counted amongst the benefits of "whiteness" in the UK is the strong possibility - as shown by the Min Quan report - of not being held fully accountable for  crimes against Chinese citizens. Even if Rob Kerr's race has nothing to do with his crime, his whiteness may certainly play a huge role  in how police, prosecutors and the law deals with his punishment and whether or not Xin Xin Liu receives appropriate justice. 

But those kinds of nuances might get in the way of the narrative. Besides, white guys are just too dreamy to allow their whiteness to be held accountable.

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

John Cho....

....bastard extraordinaire?

There was a recent online "action" carried out by a hardy band of Asian progressives and feminists whose aim was to bring attention to themselves  the phenomenon of toxic masculinity amongst Asian-American men. As reported in the Daily Dot a "twitter chat" was arranged on the subjects of toxic masculinity, patriarchy, and ....wait for it.......wait for it......our old friend Asian male misogyny. You can read the actual twitter thread in its full glory, here.

The first thing I noticed was how childish and immature the whole dialogue was - they came across like thirteen year-olds gossiping about the unpopular students in their geography class. Although several tweets used the word "discussion" to describe the event, the word "gossip" is the more appropriate word to use here for what amounts to little more than a gossipy venting session for a movement that is so irrelevant that it is only afforded a voice in the wider political arena when it attacks other Asians.

Having utilized their powers to attack and marginalize the already highly marginalized low-English proficiency, and isolated Asian FOBs, the empowered-by-their-appropriation-of-mainstream-racist-anti-Asian-strategies Asian progressive has now turned his/her attention to another Asian group long deemed embarrassing to their lifestyles; the successful Asian-American man.

In keeping with their strategy of simply making things up about Asians - which is eerily similar to the way white racism creates Asian stereotypes - the gossipy venting "townhall" simply cast aspersions on Asian men using in-group language references to spew out half-baked slogans with little of substance to actually carry meaningful dialogue.

Hilariously, the inspiration for this latest outburst of Asian progressive anti-Asian racism came about because of a casual comment made by John Cho during an interview with Vulture magazine.

As the Daily Dot reports.......
According to organizer Mark Tseng Putterman, the inspiration from the hashtag came from an interview with actor John Cho in Vulture last month, in which he said, "Asian men...suffer more than Asian women,” to which the organization responded with some tongue-in-cheek memes about Asian masculinity. 
Putterman is an organizer? Incredible. But....this is the full context of what Cho said....
My wife and I were worried when we had our firstborn, about how he was going to think of himself in a mostly white neighborhood. Particularly Asian men, I feel, we suffer more than Asian women, because we're told we're not worth anything in general. We thought casually about moving to an Asian-heavy neighborhood. And I'm glad we didn't, because there are a lot of drawbacks to that too.
So, what John Cho relates here is a very personal and profound concern for his son's future sense of identity and well-being - in a culture that denigrates Asian males - that may even, perhaps, reflect some painful personal experience in his own past. 

The response from our self-righteous, moral teachers in Asian progressivism? 

Mockery.

Yes, they mocked a guy with derogatory, racist memes about Asian masculinity for expressing a concern that he has for the well-being of his own kid. Need I say more? This is what Asian progressivism has come to represent; a movement whose activism works to silence the full diversity of the Asian-American experience. What a missed opportunity to open a meaningful dialogue.

The Daily Dot article posts some gems of Asian progressive stupidity. Kim Tran claims....
We need to claim Daniel Holtzclaw as evidence mysogynoir is a part of Asian America
This is stupid for a couple of reasons. Firstly, how John Cho's words relate to Daniel Holtzclaw is a mystery. Holtzclaw was a half-Japanese police officer convicted of a series of sexual assaults on black women, John Cho is an actor who has committed no crimes as far as I know. Apparently, Kim Tran feels there is a connection somewhere - maybe the fact that they both have Asian genetic material? Which leads nicely to the second point of stupidity.

Why is Holtzclaw "Asian"? Is it his genetics? Is it his cultural upbringing? Is it his epicanthic folds? Is it a preference for raw seafood? This question is never answered in this (according to organizer Putterman) "critical conversation about the ways that Asian-American men perpetuate misogyny."  

Race - according to consensus - is merely a social construction, and (also according to consensus), to assert race based on genetics is racist, whilst racially defining people according to social construction is also racist. No matter how you slice it, Tran has utilized white supremacist racial thinking to assert her claims.

It gets funnier. "Wu" says...
can we talk about how antiblackness is embedded in the "misogylinity" of cis asian men
Excuse me? John Cho is worried about his kid - how did the conversation go from that to the above? Without knowing it, John Cho's concern about his kid makes him a racist, sexist bastard.

Thankfully, we have organizer Mark Tseng Putterman to organize our thoughts....
Also so much anti-blackness amongst #HyperMasculAZNs, coopting stereotypes of Black male aggression and masculinity (e.g. Eddie Huang)
...with a (somewhat cowardly) passive-aggressive attack on black hip-hop culture through criticism of the much less dangerous Asian celeb. I say less dangerous, but Eddie Huang looks like the kinda crazy that you don't want to get messed up in. I'm also at a loss for why Huang is so hated by Asian progressives. Must be jealousy.

Here's another by Juliet Shen...
Violence and abuse becomes normalized as "That's just how Korean/Chinese/Vietnamese/etc guys are". But WHY?
That's why Asian men - like John Cho - agonize over the mental well-being of their sons. His comment plays directly into the question of what makes men (or women, if we are to be honest) into hyper-aggressive tools. How about addressing his point, instead of changing the subject and making random attacks on random Asian men?

But irony can be ironic sometimes. According to Julie Ae Kim....
toxic masculinity & misogyny is also much about the silencing of and dismissal of AAPI women, even in Asian am spaces 
That's ironic! John Cho made a point about the mental well-being of Asian boys who live in a culture that devalues their achievements and this should have led to an inclusive discussion since the apparent crisis of identity that Cho alludes to is, surely, a fundamental aspect of unhealthy identity formation? Instead, his concern has been silenced and dismissed, even in Asian-American spaces. These Asian progressives are, apparently, too self-involved to actually parse Cho's words.

As I read more of these wannabes' snide gripes, I came to realize that what we have here are a bunch of nobodies shitting on Asians who have achieved far more success than they could ever hope to attain. Just who are these people? Just how exactly have they advanced the Asian-American cause? If they have accomplished anything for Asian-American empowerment, it has to be the best kept secret in all of Asian-America.

Mark Tseng Putterman has accomplished "organizing", and how such characters as Kim Tran, Julie Sheng, Julie Ae Kim, and "wu", have accomplished any kind of advancement for Asian-America is not immediately clear. Bitching about people who have accomplished more than you does not advance Asians, nor is it in and of itself, an accomplishment. And this is the crux of the problem here.

By comparison, John Cho and Eddie Huang, by virtue of their achievements, have advanced Asian-Americans in the culture of America by light-years. Huang has written best-selling books that have inspired a television series - which in turn provided opportunities for more Asian-Americans to get a high-profile toehold in the acting profession where they are still largely discriminated against. Even before that, Huang was a cutting-edge chef and a media celebrity, whose extroverted personality probably encouraged more Asians to push the boundaries of limiting stereotypes than snide progressives ever could.

John Cho is a talented actor whose abilities are horribly underrated. But his performances even in canceled television shows and bit parts in movies have given hope not only to other Asian actors who sense a dramatic shift about to take place in the industry, but to many Asian-Americans who see his success as an indication that the days of dehumanizing stereotypes may be waning. He has demonstrated that Asians can have a career in entertainment without taking racially demeaning roles, and it's simply a matter of staying true to your integrity.

In short, these two Asian men who have come to be the focus of much hatred and hostility from Asian progressives have probably done more to advance Asian-America than all that twitter whining could ever hope to achieve. Most frightening of all is that these wannabes so easily conceive of Huang and Cho as being similar in kind to murderers like Elliot Roger and serial rapists like Daniel Holtzclaw. Asian progressives are either very stupid or simply spiteful and envious of Asian men who have achieved more than they.

What this twitter town hall has confirmed for me is that Asian progressivism is far more reactionary than even I thought. In their attempts to outdo each other's snideness and self-righteousness, they completely missed the opportunity to address the most important point raised by John Cho.

Here's what they avoided talking about.....
I've seen many instances where we’re seen as a little less than human, or maybe a little more than human — like ultrahuman, rather than subhuman. What is wrong with film representation? Some of it is mechanical, surprisingly. I've thought about why Asian stars — from Asia, I mean — look so much better in their Asian films than they do in their American films, and now I can answer that to some extent. There's an eye, and it's not a malicious eye, which is a way that the people working the camera and behind the scenes view us. And then they process it and they put it on film. And it's not quite human. Whereas Asian films, they are considered fully human. Fully heroic, fully comic, fully lovely, fully sad, whatever it is. And it's this combination of lighting, makeup, and costume.
Cho is referencing an idea that anyone who is truly awake in Asian-America is aware of, and is an idea that I have alluded to several times; a deeply ingrained mainstream racialized cultural conditioning that colours perceptions by fostering a, perhaps unconscious, imposition of racialized preconceptions on mainstream interactions with Asians. In other words, mainstream interactions with Asians occur through an unconscious filter that retards normal human responses towards, and understanding of, them. Maybe it is a kind of deep-rooted skepticism, or disbelief that Asians can and do possess human qualities - a skepticism that may result in anything from media portrayals that lack conviction or believability, to a lack of trust in an Asian man's ability to be a leader in industry or any other field.

Unsurprisingly, Asian progressives exhibited the same tone-deaf reactions in their twitter town hall. The skeptical snideness that diminishes the achievements of successful Asian men, the conditioning that presumes Asian misogyny to explain away Asian men's behaviour, and the shrill, almost xenophobic inability to see nuance and humanity in Asian men's drives, all point to a "way of seeing" Asian men that is largely informed and empowered by mainstream racist conditioning.

Once again, Asian progressives show their commitment to upholding white supremacy by adopting its precepts and attitude.

Monday, July 25, 2016

Amazon Reviews

And They're Very Positive Reviews...

I was happy to discover that there have been three very positive reviews of my novel posted to Amazon.....
I purchased this book to take on vacation but I ended up reading it from cover to cover before I even left. I couldn't put it down. The Legend of Fu transports you to another place and time, I felt I was observing the characters from my bedroom window. This book is full of action, intrigue but is also a tragic story that needs to be told. Smooth writing and twists in the plot will keep you glued to the book and have you trying to solve the mystery. This is a must read not only for Asia-Americans but all Americans.
..and secondly...
This book’s a real rarity: both exciting and thought-provoking. Just an excellent book! Couldn’t put it down! The action carries you along and the message makes you pause and think. Very well-written, with well-developed characters who really stay with you. I recommend it highly.
..and third....
This is a page turner with a very interesting plot. The characters are well developed and thought out. It is set in a historical perspective that most people don't know about.
This is a nice bright spot after several days of ongoing stress in the aftermath of the recent troubles we've had here.

Visit my Createspace page to order a copy.......