Walk With Me

Would you get married at 23?

Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:26:00 -0700

Marriage is tricky. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t; sometimes couples get divorced, sometimes couples stay together for 20 years and hate each other in the end but still won’t get divorced. Same-sex marriage isn’t legal when there are thousands of same-sex couples that have been together for 10, 20, 30 years whose marriages aren’t, or wouldn’t be, recognized by the state or the federal government, but there are lots of (straight) celebrity quickie marriages that end a few days later that are legal and recognized at the state and federal levels.

I don’t know why the topic of marriage irritates me so much. I don’t necessarily believe that marriage is the ultimate expression of love the way most people do. I recognize it’s a symbol that you’re willing to spend the rest of your life with that person (ideally, that’s what a marriage is, right?). Wanting to spend the rest of your life with one person is a serious commitment and takes serious dedication. Sure, I haven’t met someone who I’d want to spend the rest of my life with, so I don’t understand what it’s like to feel that type of commitment and dedication.

Maybe my ideas of marriage are backward and old-fashioned, but I feel like when you’re married, you’re suddenly barred from doing a lot of things in life. You can’t just go gallivanting in Europe or Asia or Africa or South America for two months. Ideally, your partner would support you in your decisions or you two would at least discuss these decisions; but there’s no discussion when you’re not married. You go or you stay. Easy.

It’s true; I’m selfish and pretty self-absorbed.

Anyway, one of my friends posted this op-ed by Julia Shaw on Facebook. I read it because I have a couple friends (my age, obviously) who are married, and I wondered what someone else thought of getting married at my/our age.

The piece gave me sort of a new perspective of marriage at my/our age. I hadn’t considered the part about being independent from parents’ healthcare and cell phone plans. I hadn’t considered getting married as a gateway to adulthood the way Shaw says a lot of people do. Her philosophy on the concept of “soul mates” is interesting. I do identify with Shaw’s earlier attitudes toward education and how relationships can potentially derail educational/life plans.

However, even though I’ve never been and am not married, I don’t appreciate how she says we unmarried (single or otherwise) people are “missing out on a lot of the fun.” What right does she have to say that we’re missing out? (I mean, maybe she didn’t title the piece, but the question was still asked.) Not every marriage will be like hers. There are plenty of couples that marry young and get divorced a couple years later. A lot of couples that marry young have kids and later get divorced, which can create unstable homes and missing parental figures. Not everyone is as mature as her at 23; I certainly am not.

Shaw seems to have found a stable, supportive partner. Marriage seems to have worked out for her, and she was ready for it. Good for her. Not everyone is that lucky, though.

I, for one, am not ready for marriage. And I certainly don’t feel like I’m missing out on any fun.

Does this profile picture mean anything?

Wed, 27 Mar 2013 04:17:00 -0700

Unless you live outside of the United States, under a rock, and/or just don’t pay attention to the news, you probably know that the Supreme Court of the United States has a big week. The justices are hearing two cases regarding same sex marriage, marking an important milestone in civil rights and states’ rights.

On Tuesday, the justices heard Hollingsworth v. Perry, which is about whether California’s Prop 8 will continue to be the law. At its core, the case is about same sex marriage, but the decision, which is expected to come out around late June, will also have implications when it comes to states making their own decisions (through citizens’ votes) about their laws regarding same sex marriage.

On Wednesday, the justices will hear a challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted in 1996 and defines “marriage” as a union between a man and a woman. The act also doesn’t require individual states to recognize same sex marriages. (For example, if two guys get married in, say, Massachusetts, another state, such as Oregon, isn’t legally required to recognize that marriage.)

But I’m not here to blog about my opinion of marriage or what I think the justices should do or what I think of people who I don’t agree with. If you must know, I think marriage should be defined as a union between one man and one woman – and one man and one man, and one woman and one woman. But you didn’t see me changing my profile picture to this:

(The symbol was created by the Human Rights Campaign. Once celebrities touted the symbol on their Facebook pages, it quickly went viral.)

I didn’t check my Facebook feed until the afternoon, and by that time, my feed was a sea of red squares with pink equal signs, and multiple variations.

And then I rolled my eyes at the slacktivism. Sure, I was glad to see that so many of the people I’m friends with on Facebook support same sex marriage. In a way, it’s a sign of solidarity and alliance with communities and couples that want to get married but cannot.

But is changing your profile picture actually engaging with the situation? Changing your profile picture is the least someone can do to be a part of change and the least someone can do to be a part of affecting change. I won’t be here giving advice on how to be an active and strong ally, but I question how much of an ally some people are when they seem to do the least they can do to show support. You don’t have pour all your time and energy into every cause you support since you’d probably burn out. However, doing the tiniest action you can possibly do on Facebook doesn’t seem very sincere to me. It allows you to participate from a safe distance away from very real danger, fear, bigotry, confrontation, and discussion.

More yellow peril!

Sat, 23 Feb 2013 11:30:31 -0800

These past couple weeks, news agencies (New York Times, Wall Street Journal) and companies (Coca-Cola) have reported that their networks were hacked. For years, companies have reported that their information systems were hacked by the Chinese. These hackers were traced to a group in Shanghai, appropriately called the “Shanghai Group,” which was reported to be housed in a building in Shanghai that also houses a headquarters for the People’s Liberation Army.

Last night, “Rock Center with Brian Williams” aired a segment on the hacking, titled, “Hacked!” where David Faber looked at companies that were hacked by the Chinese and talked to cyber security insiders about the Chinese “threat”.

The segment seemed to be playing into the idea of “Yellow Peril,” where Chinese people are the villains and out to get the “honest, hardworking, pulled-themselves-up-by-their-bootstraps white folk,” which I think we’ve been seeing a lot of in the past year. (Remember the Ron Paul 2012 ad and the Pete Hoekstra/Debbie SpendItNow ad?)

I get it – cyber security is a legitimate area of concern since so much of our infrastructure (water, power grids, military defense, etc.) is on some type of network and so many companies in the US have trade secrets in secret networks. We don’t want other countries to have protected information about our government; we don’t want other/foreign companies to get a hold of trade secrets.

I get it.

But that absolutely doesn’t give media makers or interviewees free reign to paint a picture of danger where Chinese people become the bad guys. Even though the segment is informative and shows you one company that got hacked and how they found out, I thought the segment ultimately showed Chinese people as villainous. The hackers did whatever they could, and were apparently successful, to get these trade and defense secrets.

Faber interviews General Michael Hayden, who accuses the Chinese government of wanting to build their “economic empire by stealing American trade secrets.”

“This is stealing American wealth; it’s stealing American jobs; it’s stealing American competitive advantage,” Hayden says.

That accusation is a pretty serious speculation, and all it does is raise fear of the Chinese. It purports the idea that the Chinese are a ruthless, nasty people who can only steal, copy, and be super secretive. (Remember the fake Apple stores in China?)

The Chinese community doesn’t need any more of this. The Asian and Asian-American communities don’t need any more of this.

This doesn’t mean I sympathize with the Chinese government or the hackers. The obvious lack of access to information, truth, and different ways of thought, as well as the widespread obvious misinformation/propaganda, corruption, and control of the Chinese people are serious problems with the Chinese government.

Adventures in microaggression!

Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:06:33 -0800

For a long time, I didn’t know that statements such as, “You speak really good English,” and “But, where are you really from?” had a term – microaggression. Microaggressions are those statements and actions that aren’t physically or verbally threatening, but have subtle, often demeaning, messages behind them. The person behind the action (or statement) doesn’t intentionally say those things to hurt the other people. For example, saying “You speak English beautifully,” to me means that the person who said it probably assumed I was going to have an accent, which assumes that I wasn’t born in the US, that I was a recent immigrant (the “forever foreigner” myth), or something along those lines of assumption. (Sure, I’m making assumptions about people, but, honestly, why else would you tell someone their English is “beautiful”?)

It doesn’t make me feel very good; it’s demeaning and insulting.

These past couple days, I’ve been noticing more microaggressions closer around me. One smaller incident happened this past Sunday when I was out at dinner with my family. We sat at the hot pot bar, and the man who sat down next to me saw that I pulled out the book I was reading from my purse (“The Odyssey”) when I finished eating. He asked, “That good, huh,” referring to the book. To be polite, I smiled and said that it was a good book (it has monsters, gods, undying and patient love, suffering, rewards, adventure, violence, and peace – what else do you want?). Then his next question was, “So is that in your native language?”

I stopped trying to read and looked at him.

“What? Uh, this is a Greek story, ‘The Odyssey,’ but it’s in English,” I said.

“Oh, you don’t sound foreign, no accent at all,” he replied. Excuse me? I don’t sound foreign? What does that even mean? Was he expecting me to have an accent? Why did he think that I would have an accent? Also, didn’t he hear me talking to my family since he was sitting next to me?

“Actually, I was born here,” I said as politely as I could.

“Oh, well, you’re an American kid, then,” he said.

Uh. Well, yeah, duh. Did he assume I wasn’t born in the US? Why did he think that? What if I had been reading the story in Greek? He got to asking me if I was in school, what I majored in, and what my plans were. I wonder how he felt when I told him one of my majors was Chinese, and that I chose the language focus. (Chinese is my native language; English is technically my second language.) Telling me I speak English with no accent or that I don’t “sound foreign” isn’t a compliment to me; that’s another way of saying English spoken by non-native English speakers who have an accent is somehow of lesser quality.

So, that’s part one of the adventure from this week.

The second part is a culmination of comments from work, but they’ve been especially heavy this week.

I think you might know how I feel about people who have Asian fetishes (if you don’t, click here). I don’t think much of those who have an obsession with Japanese culture, even if it doesn’t/especially if it manifests itself in one or more of the following: anime, terrible Japanese screamo/bad Japanese pop, anime, Harajuku Girls, anime, and/or sexual activities. Went to Japan once or twice? Cool, you’ve traveled a little. Learned Japanese? Awesome, you can speak a second language. Congratulations, you’re a little bit better than most people in the US.

But wait, oh, you think you can school us on the pronunciation of Japanese words? Sure, help our coworker, but please stop acting like you know everything about the Japanese language because you’ve been to Japan. I am not impressed. Oh, what was that, you’re excited about Chinese new year? Am I supposed to be impressed that you know about Chinese new year because everyone else is igna’ant about lunar new years’?

But how is this a microaggression? Why are any of these things demeaning or insulting? Asian cultures are so much more than the entertainment (music, movies, animes and cartoons, etc.), sexual fetishes, “pretty sounding” languages, or “cute little Asian things” that you love so much. You reduced us – whole communities of people – to objects without histories that includes colonization, oppression, war atrocities, civilizations built and destroyed, architectural achievements, literary works, art movements, culinary transformations, political reforms, and so much of what makes the world we all live in an interesting place.

Bonus story: I thought I had blogged about the microaggression in Amsterdam, but I didn’t. When I was at my hostel eating dinner one night, there was an older gentleman also sitting at the bar. (I think he was in some type of mid-life crisis. I could almost see his chest hair struggling to break through the constraints of his t-shirt and the grease in his curly, ear-length gray hair.) The bartender went to the kitchen to get the man’s food, so the man started talking to me because it was the two of us at the bar. And the first thing he said was, “So, are you visiting from China?”

“What? No, I’m from the US,” I said. He asked where, and I said Oregon. (Then he tried to talk shit about Oregon.)

In all honesty, who asks “Are you from [country]?” instead of “Where are you from?” What, did you want to play “Guess the country”?

Bonus videos:

“White Friends” by JustKiddingFilms - Best line because I HATE IT when people use this to attempt justifying their microaggression: “When I was studying abroad in Shanghai….”

“Things Asians Hate” by Eliot Chang - Best lines: “What do you think of Jeremy Lin?” “Can you teach me how to use chopsticks?” “How do you say ‘fuck’ in your language?”

In short, this has been a shit week for the US

Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:54:00 -0800

This has been a horrific week for the United States. On Tuesday, there was a shooting at Clackamas Town Center near Portland, Oregon. Three people died, including the gunman, Jacob Taylor Roberts, who shot himself. This morning, there was a shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newton, Connecticut. Twenty children and eight adults died, including the gunman, Adam Lanza, who shot himself in the school. (I would also like to mention that a 36 year old man stabbed 22 children in a primary school in Chenping, China today, too.)

A lot of Facebook statuses have been sad and angry that these things happened. Some of those statuses went straight to the point and called the gunmen “idiots.” I don’t really know if it’s appropriate to call them “idiots” or to call their actions “stupid” because we just don’t know what was going on in their head or in their lives. Their actions may have been random and senseless, but judging the people and their actions assumes too much.

Other people are saying what a crazy, sad, and dangerous world we live in. Though the world we live in isn’t totally peaceful, I still don’t think the world is sad and dangerous.

I have been blessed to have lived a safe and mostly happy life so far. I haven’t grown up in a neighborhood where violence is common. I managed to stay safe in Eugene when I went to school there, and my life didn’t turn in to “Taken” when I went to Paris. Maybe you don’t take me as seriously now. But maybe you should. If you really believed the world was a dangerous place, would you have returned to the mall (a different mall maybe) to do some shopping for the holidays? Would you have gone to work? Are you going to start home schooling your children now?

Even though something tragic and violent happened at home, my sense of security isn’t exactly shattered. There are places in the world that are at war, whether it’s rebels fighting to force a government out of power or gangs warring over territory and control. Still, after spending time abroad and studying the power of storytelling (i.e. journalism), one of the most important things I’ve learned is that the world in general isn’t a bad place.

It has been this week that has reaffirmed my belief that I should try to see as much of the world as soon as I can. I continue in my refusal to spend my time as a 20-something year old worrying about money and work and school. If anything, I worry about money so I can see the world and pay for law school – in that order. Those are the things I want to do as a young person.

Speaking of being a young person, one thing that’s a little bit difficult to grasp, among other things about these shootings, is that both of these gunmen were around my age. Taylor was 22 and Lanza was 20. Their lives were just beginning, just as mine is. I can feel hopeless and sad about some things because I’m stubborn. Once I say I want to do something or plan to do something, it’s difficult to convince me otherwise.

Words are difficult to find to express my condolences to the families that have lost a loved one this week and to those who experienced a core-shaking fear that nobody should ever experience in their lives. But know that everybody takes their own time and their own healing route and that nobody can heal you except for yourself. It will be ok.

(This could’ve been a post about gun control in the US. Here’s what I have to say on that: The Second Amendment was written in a time when the independence of the colonies was threatened, not in our time. Situations and communities evolve, as do laws and Amendments. Let’s change this. Let’s stop talking about being proactive and start being proactive.)

Good riddance, election season is over

Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:27:00 -0800

My faith in humanity has be restored. Slightly. Good job, ‘Murrica.

Last night’s election was pretty exciting, wouldn’t you say? While I’m not excited for four more years of Obama, I voted for him because I think he does try to put other issues besides the economy at the forefront of our lives. The economy is important, but the decisions about what I do to my body are my own decisions and helping those who are less-privileged should be priorities, too.

And, let’s be real, I know how this game works - if I wanted my voted to count, a vote for the Independent or Libertarian party wouldn’t have counted as much. (Herein lies the problem - because everyone thinks this way, we don’t have powerful parties that aren’t the Democrats or the GOP. This I recognize.)

As my brother pointed out, political parties are a lot about money, too. We’re pretty sure that the Democratic party and the Republican are the two biggest parties because they don’t just have a lot of money - they have the most money out of all the political parties (at least those listed in our voter’s guides). If the other national political parties had more money, would they have more power? Would they be heard more?

And who pays attention to the polls before election day? I don’t understand why we have so many sample sets from different organizations with different (or similar) agendas. Data is skewed by, among other things, who you ask, when you ask, what you ask, where you ask, how the data is presented, and where the data is presented. The polls before election day are useless to me - they’re only accurate for that sample set, and not anybody else. So what if it was accurate after? The election could’ve easily gone the other way. Even if you compiled all the polls just from this election, that’s no concrete prediction. It just isn’t logical to me; it’s a jump in logic. How can you say This Person will probably be President because This/These Poll/s say/s so? You might as well have had Paul the Octopus predict who the President would be - it would’ve been quicker, and we could put all suspicion and drama to an end that much sooner.

Yes, I'm blogging about "Gangnam Style"

Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:01:33 -0700

Ok, I’ll be honest with you - I am so sick of this song. I don’t hate it - it is catchy, the music video is silly, and the associated dance is ridiculous (I’m pretty sure it’s becoming a mainstay at clubs now) - I just don’t like hearing it. I’ve heard it too much. The Korean restaurant my family and I go to have that music video on loop (with other Kpop videos), and it plays what feels like every five minutes. It’s too blown up - I’m generally not a fan of things once they become too mainstream, not because I’m some sort of hipster, but because once these things are everywhere, these things become almost inescapable so I just stop tuning in.

Actually, this post isn’t about “Gangnam Style.” (Sidenote: Did you know that the song has helped PSY’s father’s company? I guess this is one of those effects that people just don’t think about because it’s not associated with the music industry.)

A link to a blog post, titled, “Gangnam Style, Dissected: The Subversive Message Within South Korea’s Music Video Sensation,” written by Max Fisher forThe Atlanticshowed up on my Facebook newsfeed. At first, I was impressed that there was a social commentary in the song, whether PSY intended it or not. I was impressed that someone took the time to look at the messages in “Gangnam Style.” I learned about how “Gangnam Style” isn’t just a pop song - it reinforced the idea that Western influences are, indeed, everywhere and pervasive.

But then I wondered who this Max Fisher was. Who is he to make social commentary for a South Korean music phenomenon? Does he identify as Asian-American, Asian, South Korean, North Korean? Does he live in South Korea, has he lived there in the past - what makes him qualified to talk about such things? In the post, he talks to people who are South Korean, bloggers of South Korean events, but does that make his dissection legitimate? It certainly is valuable, and it does force readers to think critically about something many might think is, “Oh, another Asian being kooky. Haha, all Asians are kooky.”

Hm. I’ll let you decide.

Anywhere, if you’re interested, here’s a “Gangnam Style” translated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HUk69c72UlY

“True Skin” Written and directed by Stephan...

Thu, 11 Oct 2012 19:29:00 -0700

“True Skin”

Written and directed by Stephan Zlotescu

Director of photography: H1

What does the film say about Bangkok? At first glance, Bangkok is a destination for sex tourism (without actually saying it; that’s not even what the film is about), criminals, the black market, danger, escape. Bangkok in the future, as portrayed in the film, is still that place. Is that the Bangkok that existed 10 years ago? Is it the Bangkok most people are familiar with? Is it the Bangkok that exists today? Why does this image of Bangkok still exist today? right now?

Though the portrayal of Bangkok is problematic, the short is still pretty exciting, and the aesthetic of the short is cool - sleek, minimal, neon-colored. The story might seem tired - and if it reminds you of “Total Recall,” “District 9,” “Blade Runner” (only one of which I’ve watched, and I didn’t even finish it), or anything else, you aren’t the only one. N1ON Productions says this is a “glimpse into a much larger story in the works,” so maybe the story will change. Give it a watch if you have a few minutes.

(Please watch the trailer first before reading.) I saw this...

Sun, 23 Sep 2012 01:07:03 -0700

(Please watch the trailer first before reading.)

I saw this trailer on channelAPA.com. Before I watched the clip, I read the description. My first thought was that the plot would be an interesting point of view because the plot was about a Vietnamese-Australian woman, a point of view that is hard to come by in the US. I was intrigued because the movie was about a story about the Vietnamese-Australian experience coupled with the experience of being a woman.

Turns out I was sort of right and sort of wrong. The parts I got right were the things the trailer showed. There is a point of view and a strong, clear voice of a Vietnamese-Australian woman (regardless of how her morals become gray during the process of the movie) - that’s something that goes against the grain of the stereotype of Asian women being weak and without a voice. The parts I got wrong (or just didn’t anticipate) were the things the movie doesn’t say about Asian women (or Vietnamese/Vietnamese-Australian) women. I read that Linh becomes a prostitute, and the trailer became another example of Asian women, especially SE Asian women, becoming a commodified object, not to mention purely an object of lust and desire and sex, instead of, oh, I don’t know, an actual person.

But the trailer (and probably the movie) doesn’t just show how Linh becomes the object of desire, it gives Linh time to narrate. It gives Linh her own voice, one with which to share her reasons for doing what she does and, potentially, how she deals with her inner conflicts. It makes Linh a human, and not an object, which pushes some boundaries of thought somewhere (I hope, anyway).

So I guess I’m sort of undecided about the movie. It has its good points, which are important, but it also has common stereotypes that some people might not be able to get past. Will they be able to move past Linh-the-prostitute and see that it’s important to recognize Linh, and by extension all Asian women (and men!), as a person?

The repercussions of Facebook comments

Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:32:00 -0700

(Ok, before you start reading, I have to warn you that this is a long post. It mostly consists of long Facebook comments, but I also have quite a bit to say about those comments. This post isn’t about Victoria’s Secret lingerie line “Go East” or the racist “Sexy Little Geisha” get up on their site; it’s about the response to the Racialicious post I saw on Facebook.)

About a week ago, Angry Asian Man and Racialicious and a whole host of other blogs wrote about Victoria’s Secret’ new line called “Go East.” I did my usual cynical, “That’s fucked up.” It raised my eyebrows because it was creepy and reminded me that “Asian” and “Asian women” are still synonomous with “exotic” (among other things, such as “foreign,” “obedient,” and “passive”). Then I left it at that.

I didn’t really give it much more thought until yesterday when one of my friends posted the Racialicious post on his Facebook, and I was reading through a couple of the comments. I really had no choice to react to one comment because I felt as if there was a huge misunderstanding, and I wanted to make something clear to this person.

(A is for one person, B is for a second person. No edits have been made to the Facebook comments, except for names. I’m also allowed to use these comments without permission because the only people who can identify the commenters are those who can see the original post on my friend’s wall. I’m not here to make you look bad. I’m here to expose a way of thought that I disagree with and to explain what makes sense to me.)

A: Meh, perhaps the copy is a bit insensitive, but I find it ironic to think of oriental cultures as being modest sexually. To take offense to the “hypersexualization of the culture,” is a bit insincere. This is a region that is (admittedly lumping an array of oriental cultures into one here) known for concubines, the rape of nanking, human trafficking/prostitution, animated porn, the highest populated countries (the stork didn’t bring ‘em), the karma sutra, child sex huts (either thailand or cambodia, but I just saw a think about it on NatGeo), etc. Is it that much of a stretch to add cherry blossoms to a teddy? Has anyone ever taken offense to a victorian styled bodice or a leopard print bra? Not everything culturally rooted has to be an international incident. For all we know, the entire line could have been designed by an asian person, would that change things? Don’t drink the kool aid.

My response: Maybe I missed the memo on the sarcasm, whoever you are A (I don’t know who you are), but that type of ignorance is a great reason why this type of issue even appeared Racialicious. (I’m only going to address a few things bc there’s too much to address, and I don’t want to clog up [name]’s wall more than I am going to.)

Are you implying that Asian cultures have brought on these stereotypes ourselves? In whose point of view has this generalized, hypersexualized view of Asian culture(s) been created in? I hardly think Asian people have done it to ourselves.

I’d like to point out that the rape of Nanking was not solely a physical rape. It’s not called the “rape of Nanking” just because thousands of people were raped. The was a severe, debilitating psychological rape of the Chinese by the Japanese through physical rape, pillage, murder, pretty much anything to undermine the safety and morality of the Chinese was done to ensure total domination. What rape comes down to a lot of the time is power of the aggressor - the rape of Nanking is a supreme example.

And, maybe it was a typo, but it’s actually called “The Kama Sutra.”

Finally, to answer your question – it’s certainly not ok to perpetuate the stereotype of the hypersexualized Asian woman. By putting cherry blossoms on the teddy and dressing up the model in “yellow face” suggests the idea that Asian women are ready and willing sex objects, an idea that has been around for a really long time. Some people don’t know know they’re doing it, and that’s both dangerous and unfair. Some people know they’re doing it, and that…well, that’s just creepy. Even if the line was designed by someone Asian, that doesn’t make it ok; it’s not just something that “looks pretty on a girl,” it becomes the fantasy of some people based on nothing more than ethnicity and assumed roles, which can be negative (and is negative in this case).

A’s response:

It’s not sarcasm, it was a typo, and I’m aware of the history of nanking, hence the reference. Now: I’m not saying that asian cultures bring it on themselves, I’m saying that I think this is an exaggeration of hypersexualizaton. I consider something such as Sweet Sweetback’s Badass Song to be an example of such a thing, not props and patterns in an entirely sexual product catalog. Why cant oriental patterns look pretty on a girl the same as everything else? Like I said, the copywriting is, eh, in poor taste, but the product isn’t a big deal. #firstworldproblems. Come on, there are bigger problems in the world tham vickis secret fall collection

I didn’t respond to A’s second comment because by the time I saw it, there was a whole other discussion going on, which I was watching. Anyway, I’m going to respond to A’s response now.

To A: I don’t understand why you made the Nanking reference then. Maybe I’ve misinterpreted your examples, but from your evidence, it seems to me that you’re suggesting that because there’s all of this sexual attention/aggression in Asia, there’s no reason to be angry that Asian culture is portrayed this way. I guess that’s what you meant by “insincere” – that it’s ironic that there are Asian people angry about how sexualized Asian culture is. Why is it ironic to you that Asian people are portrayed a hypersexualized? I asked you in whose view were these portrayals created because I wanted to point out that groups of people view themselves one way, and outsiders view them another way. I’m pretty sure Asian people generally aren’t walking the general public around saying things like, “I’m hypersexual! And I just want to have sex all the time!” That’s something outsiders have decided about Asians as a group, without asking what individual communities are like.

Props and patterns (and the “yellow face”) suggest things/ideas, right? And isn’t it the mere suggestion that triggers the sexual fantasy? (Or any fantasy at all, I guess.) That you have these props and patterns in the catalog made for sexual fantasy is the problem. It isn’t that “oriental patterns” don’t look pretty on every girl; it’s that these “oriental patterns” suggest the fantasy – and that’s a problem because a large part of history of Asian women is the idea that we’re inherently hypersexual (and obedient, etc.). The physical product might not be a big deal – it’s the ideas associated and suggested by the product that are the problems. The physical product is part of the problem. And that’s why I’m angry.

And on to the next comment, from B:

“By putting cherry blossoms on the teddy and dressing up the model in ‘yellow face’ suggests the idea that Asian women are ready and willing sex objects, an idea that has been around for a really long time. Some people don’t know know they’re doing it, and that’s both dangerous and unfair.”

“it becomes the fantasy of some people based on nothing more than ethnicity and assumed roles”

This is exactly what I’m talking about. You can’t make outrageous jumps in logic like these and expect never to have expound on them. Slippery, flawed logic from heavily biased group think circle jerk. Every racialicious zombie vomits the same drivel and not one of them is able to logically support their claims. Or are you the one who is able to make me gain respect for them? Nobody is suggesting that Asian women are ready and willing sex objects – only you. (and racialicious nutcases alike – is it not a red flag to you that the name of the blog itself is a contrived attempt to brand race issues as sexy, trendy, or cool? And how problematic that is? This was part of the problem with the kony propaganda!)

First of all, I don’t know where this guy (and it is a guy) gets off telling me that 1: I’m making “outrageous jumps in logic” and 2: “expect never to have expound on them.” I didn’t realize that I had to explain that this was something I’ve experienced in my life as an APIA woman. I wasn’t aware that my own statements about what has happened in my life had to be “logically” supported. Exactly what claim do I have to support? That Asian women/culture is portrayed at hypersexualized? Um, there’s history, for starters. There are the experiences of other Asian women who have been viewed as purely sexual objects. There are people who have a sexual preference for Asian people/exclusively have sex/want to have sex with Asian people because they think Asian people are submissive, hypersexualized, effeminate, or whatever.

Maybe it was because I didn’t explicitly state, “This has happened to me before.” Would he have taken a step back and thought about why I would say what I said? (Maybe not, after the other comments he left for my other friend.) And I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one who’s aware of the idea of Asian women as submissive sexual objects. If it’s just me, how come I’ve heard it from other Asian women? And not just a handful, but hundreds? (First-hand experiences, second-hand stories, film clips, essays, etc.) If it’s just me, then how come there’s such a thing as having “yellow fever/plague”?

Does it make me a zombie because I’m just expressing something that makes sense to me because I am living it? Come on, dude, I think I know what I’m talking about when I’m talking about my life.

Maybe this is me reverting to juvenile feelings, but it does hurt when my ideas are immediately written off. It hurts when someone who doesn’t even try to ask me what I mean, but instead just goes on a rant about how I’m wrong (about my own life nonetheless). It does hurt me that there are people who refuse to acknowledge that there’s a common portrayal and view of Asian (and APIA) women/culture. It makes me feel threatened. It makes me feel unsafe.

PS: To end this somewhat ironically, B also raged about how tumblr activism is bullshit. Well, here’s to you, kiddo, because I’m not on tumblr to be an activist, and if you looked through my blog, you would see that.

“…We have a justice system that’s encouraging...

Tue, 24 Jul 2012 01:37:59 -0700

“…We have a justice system that’s encouraging girls to keep their mouth shut, at least one specific girl. That’s completely counter to what we need to have happen in this country.”

Agreed.

Although, here’s what I would like to know:

1) How old are Will Frey and Austin Zehnder? I understand that you’re not allowed to release the names of people under the age of 18 without parental consent in most cases. But then why have a trial, and then tell Dietrich that she can’t name the boys? In any case, now that their names are out there, I don’t have a problem naming Will Frey and Austin Zehnder as rapists.

2) WHY DO PEOPLE TELL RAPE AND ASSAULT VICTIMS TO KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT?

Follow-up: The Huffington Post (via AP) - Savannah Dietrich Doesn’t Face Contempt Charge For Revealing Names of Sexual Attackers

Chris Klein, an attorney for one of the boys, said publicizing their names may create problems for them in the future.

“There’s always that possibility and in any type of scenario like this you run that risk,” he said. “Now whether both these boys can overcome those hurdles, it’s too early to determine that.”

Well, no shit - these boys raped a girl. And then they posted the pictures online? Did they think they were going to get away with it? Did they think there were no consequences in the future for violating Savannah?

In the news this week so far...

Thu, 19 Jul 2012 04:45:09 -0700

For some reason, my Google Reader yesterday had more APIA-related stories that usual. My ears perked - and what I saw were more of the same things I have been seeing for a long time. At this point, I’m not sure if I should be surprised anymore, but I’m certainly frustrated.

USA Today - Survey of Asian Americans show wide diversity of faiths

Even though the results from “The Rise of Asian Americans” from the Pew Research Center (a study, which, in my opinion, continues the trend of lumping individuals into one category, as well as contributes to stereotypes abt the APIA community), I think the assumption in the article was that all APIAs are the same religion. A lot of my APIA friends identify as Catholic, some Christian, and some Buddhist. Some don’t believe in a particular system. Sure, it might’ve been obvious to me because I am a part of this community, but shouldn’t it also have been obvious to people who aren’t a part of our communities? Religion is something I think a lot more people can grasp because most people are part of communities where there are different religions and spiritualities - even if they disagree with other belief systems, they acknowledge that not everyone in their communities have the same religions. To automatically assume that all APIAs have the same religious or spiritual background is, again, lumping us into one category, thereby denying the idea that we are different in our ethnicities, family backgrounds, and academic representation. I guess the study is telling me (and a lot of other people) what I (we) already know, so why do we need confirmation that we are a diverse group of people? Sure the numbers are interesting, but are they necessary?

CNN.com - Why Asians want to move to the U.S.

This story also cites the Pew Research Center study from above. The people interviewed for the story give legitimate reasons for wanting to move to the US, but the story also contributes to two myths. More opportunities, better education - those are the reasons a lot of people immigrate to the US (and not just Asian immigrants, mind you). First, the story contributes to the idea that all Asians will be a foreigner forever - the “forever foreigner” myth. The last couple of times people asked me where I was from, I was lucky that they accepted my answer without asking me where I was “really” from. (When I was in Amsterdam, one of the guys at the bar assumed I was from Japan. When I said I wasn’t, he asked if I was visiting from China. I told him I was from Portland, then ditched him because I think he was in the throes of a mid-life crisis.) But I know better than to assume that people are generally becoming better at accepting US cities/towns as answers - and part of it is because of stories like this one. Remember, dear friends, that though some of us may be new (or older) immigrants, a lot of us were born in US, too. (If you didn’t catch on to the sarcasm there, I feel for you. A little bit.) Second, Sean Luo, one of the interviewees, said that opportunities are equal in the US - the “equal opportunity” myth:

“No matter who you are, chances (in the United States) are equal for everyone, ” said Luo, adding that as a first-generation American, there have been difficult adjustments.

That to me just isn’t the truth anymore. It hasn’t been the truth for me for a long time. If anything, the myth itself is quickly is eroding because of factors such as race/ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, income level, etc. The idea of equal opportunities isn’t limited to APIAs and our families - it’s spread across a lot of other communities that have immigrated. The questions I always ask when I hear people say the US is full of opportunities are, “Equal opportunities from whom? For everyone, regardless of gender, ethnic background, income level, sexual identity? Certainly not. Equal opportunities for those who are privileged? those who are able to speak up, those who are able to go to school, those who are empowered to do so?”

Here are a couple more stories that caught my eye:

The Huffington Post - Racist Travel Ad Tells People to ‘See Asia as Asians Do’
Hyphen Magazine - Politics: Aide to Washington’s GOP Candidate for Governor Resigns Over Derogatory Tweets

An un-review of "The Newsroom"

Tue, 03 Jul 2012 01:01:00 -0700

A couple days ago, I saw that the entire first episode of “The Newsroom” was available on YouTube. I hadn’t really been anticipating the show because I don’t have HBO, I didn’t really care for a show about how a news show (and its anchors, producers, writers, researchers, etc.) decides to muck it up and be radical by telling hard news, and, while I admire Aaron Sorkin’s writing and storytelling abilities, I just wasn’t interested. Sorkin, you’re preaching to someone who already understands the position you seem to have taken, and I’m trying to find views that are different than my own.

I mean, oh, no, a news show that decides to be serious and actually care about what’s happening in the world, instead of being self-absorbed in its own life and report the latest trysts between Kanye and Kim or whoever. Why is that idea so radical?

The overall theme of the show seems to be just that – hard-hitting news stories that affect not just you and me and everyone we know, but entire communities and even the whole world – is giving way to celebrity culture and feel-good human interest stories. I get it. I agree. That’s what you see on popular news shows right now. And when it isn’t about celebrities or those human interest stories, the news often seems to be relayed facts from some press release without a lot of research. (Tell me if I’m wrong, but don’t misunderstand me – there is journalism that still questions the answers we get and asks about the human condition in serious and thought-provoking manners.)

As a journalism student, I learned that “journalism” is a tool – a tool we need to use, whether we consume it, create it, or both. To let that power go to…uncovering the truth about Tom and Katie’s divorce does worry me. So if there’s one thing I will give the show credit for, it’s making people see that our world of journalism right now isn’t what it could – and, in my opinion, should – be.

Yet, I have a feeling that those who will watch “The Newsroom” are people who are Sorkin fans, fans of the actresses/actors on the show, and probably those who agree with the show’s position on journalism. (I could be wrong, and I would gladly be wrong; I mean, there are probably Sorkin fans who don’t think today’s journalism is in any trouble at all.)

The show obviously isn’t catering to people who probably should watch the show – people my age who care more about Miley’s engagement to Liam H-something than about the elections in Mexico or Egypt. I get it, my generation doesn’t really care.

But here’s where I sympathize with my generation. Some of us are overwhelmed by the flood of information (it’s one of the things that happens when we’re plugged in to our phones and computers all day, every day). Some of us don’t know where to begin – there are a lot of resources, and that can be daunting. There are a lot of problems in the world and choosing one area to focus on might seem unfair.

But giving up completely without staring somewhere – AP, BBC, Reuters – is dangerously apathetic.

(If, by now, you’ve decided that I’m a hypocrite, consider the fact that you don’t know what I plan to do with my life.)

This is one facet of the story of Scarlett Ecstasy. I chose to...

Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:21:11 -0700

This is one facet of the story of Scarlett Ecstasy. I chose to focus on the process of becoming a drag queen and what it means to be a drag queen. Even though the piece is about one person, I hope the piece intrigues you and inspires you to think about gender roles in our world today.

(I made this for a photojournalism class. I’m still learning photography [not “about” it], and I had never used Final Cut Pro before, so excuse any hiccups you see/hear, unless it’s a really grave error.)

(Also, a HUGE thank you to Alex S. for taking the time to share his story and thoughts with me. I know he was super busy during the term, so I really appreciate him letting me into a part of his world. Thank you! You are awesome!!)

Earlier this week, the US Census released data from 2011 and,...

Sun, 20 May 2012 03:30:00 -0700

Earlier this week, the US Census released data from 2011 and, for the first time, there were more babies of color born in 2011 than white babies born in the same year.

I originally saw the AP article in the Chicago Sun-Times. And I thought, “Annnnd let the racism begin!” Well, apparently, there were actually people worried about this! So Jay Smooth made a video about it.

I don’t like it when people have Asian fetishes. I...

Sun, 13 May 2012 14:40:00 -0700

I don’t like it when people have Asian fetishes. I don’t like yellow fever, yellow plague - whatever you call it to justify liking only Asian women, it’s disgusting.

It’s not just disgusting on a physical level. You like Asian women based on the premise that we’re “supposed” to be passive, quiet, obedient, and exotic. You like Asian women based only on those few qualities, and without regard to who that woman might actually be.

Am I wrong in these assumptions about most who have Asian fetishes?

I want to watch this, and see what happens.

EDIT: This goes for women who have Asian fetishes, too.

APIA Heritage Month on Xfinity

Sun, 13 May 2012 14:19:00 -0700

Asian American Heritage Month is almost half over. It’s our opportunity to educate those not in our communities about our histories and personal experiences. We have the opportunity to share and bond over personal experiences. We can do it any other time of the year, too – I regularly enjoy posting APIA-related news on Facebook/Twitter – but May is an especially opportune time because it’s the time when all of our APIA communities can come together.

So when I was flipping through the tv guide on Xfinity and saw the green banner declaring “Asian American Heritage Month special,” I was intrigued. What did they have on there? I knew Who made the films and music and cartoons in that special? Where did they come from? I saw the banner a bunch of times, and didn’t click on it with the remote because I thought, like everything on Xfinity, you had to pay for it. So I ignored it, and continued flipping through the guide hoping to find something good to watch in my small breaks from studying.

Then Friday night, I was hanging out with one of my friends who saw the banner, and he clicked on it. And lo-and-behold, there was actual APIA substance on there – “Lt. Watada,” the documentary on Ehren Watada (I’ve met his dad, and he’s so cool), and “Aoki,” a documentary on Richard Aoki, a civil rights activist. There biographies on prominent APIA in our mainstream media, too.

That was pretty cool, I thought, Xfinity is doing something right. They’re looking for the stories about Asian Americans, those who identify as such, those who were born in the US. Those who are continually put in the category of “forever foreigner” because some people might not be able to understand that we aren’t all immigrants, that some of us were actually born in the US – these were some of our stories.

Then my friend found gold: music videos from Korea and Japan. We went through Super Junior, G-Dragon, BigBang, and T-ARA.

And then I asked myself, “What about the APIA artists? Where are they in this?” I get that Kpop (and Jpop, too) is a really big business right now – you’re starting to see groups like Wonder Girls come over to the US to try to build an English-speaking fan base, and everyone I know (well, everyone I know in my age group) knows of or listens to Kpop. Some of us have SuJu on our workout playlists, some of us listen to it when we just want to turn our brains off ).

But here’s the thing: even though it’s popular, Kpop on something like Xfinity still contributes to the idea that Asians, and APIAs, will always be foreigners, that we’ll never belong, that we’ll never assimilate, that everything we do will be “exotic.” It’s just the exact opposite of stories that “Aoki” or “Lt. Watada” share. For those who aren’t in or involved with the APIA community, I fear that the “forever foreigner” myth will only become stronger because there’s so much more Asian media that’s mainstream (that’s being transported to the US) than Asian American media that’s mainstream (in the US).

So while I’m grateful for the burgeoning presence of Asians and Asian Americans in mainstream media (John Cho, Kal Penn, Harry Shum Jr., Jenna Ushkowitz, apl.de.ap, B.D. Wong, Far East Movement, etc.), I would also like to caution everyone, APIA or not, to make the effort to be aware that “Asian” isn’t synonymous with “foreigner.” Even if it seems as if we get a lot of our entertainment from overseas sources, APIAs do exists, and we’re creating our own stories. Some of our families have been here for generations, some of us are the first generation to be born in the US, and, yes, some of us immigrated here. And it’s not knowing the difference that’s important – it’s knowing enough to not assume that we’re all recent immigrants that’s important.

Eurotrip 2011

Sun, 29 Jan 2012 06:00:05 -0800

Five countries, three weeks, one backpack.

It was my trip, my opportunity to see how to travel on my own. After Thailand, I was officially “bitten” by the travel bug. Ten weeks of school was kind of grueling (first world problems, I know) - but suddenly, the day of departure was there. Of course I was nervous, but I was also excited.

My favorite part of the trip? London. There was Emirates stadium, the tube, double decker buses, and a Harry Potter tour. I saw new years fireworks at the London Eye and Big Ben. My couchsurfing host was awesome. We ate curry and visited a few markets.

I guess my question now is: when and where is my next trip?

1.2.2011 British Museum, London, England Rosetta Stone

Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:01:05 -0800

1.2.2011

British Museum, London, England

Rosetta Stone

1.2.2011 London, England British Museum

Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:01:05 -0800

1.2.2011

London, England

British Museum