Welcome to A Guide to Asian American Empowerment

Register on the home page for full site privileges.




In the Chat Room

In the Forum
 Apple Supplier is Richest Man in Taiwan
 Charlie Chan The Movie(2009)
 Nepal considers nudity ban on Everest
 Korea Has 1 Million Foreign-Born Residents
 WM Kills AF Girlfriend, Dumps Body in Garbage Can
 Dems to Try to Pass Hate Crime Measure
 Who's Indian?? I have a question!

Go to the Forum



Security Code:
Security Code
Type Security Code

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

Send a Postcard
Do your part to spread Asian American awareness by sending this postcard to your friends! Part of a series.

Read More and Comment

Get Our News Feed
Add even fresher Asian American content to your Web site! Just click here for HTML code you can cut and paste into your site to generate a live feed of our most recent headlines.

Click here to see how the live feed will appear on your site.

Or click here for an RSS feed.

The Passions of Suzie Wong Revisited
Posted by Andrew on Wednesday, April 21 @ 10:00:00 EDT
Dating and Sexuality 2004 Rev. Sequoyah Ade
Aboriginal Intelligence
January 4, 2004

Author's note: The commentary herein should be viewed as an analysis of a social issue and not as a rationale for justifying anti-miscegenation. I contend that racism, the sociological practice of one racial/ethnic group having political/ social / psychological dominance over others is at the root of the subject discussed.

As of late, at least since the mid-seventies, interracial dating and marriage has taken on a new openness. American movie audience attendance figures astounded the box offices and critics alike in the sixties when people actually paid to see "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" At the time of the films release, interracial marriage was not just frowned upon but still subject to social and legal prosecution in most U.S. States and communities. Since the earliest beginnings of European conquest in North America, laws, proscriptions and punishments were drafted and executed expressly in the name of White racial purity. Laws prohibiting marriage between White persons and a "Negro, Mulatto, or Mongolian", (Takaki, "A different mirror", p. 205) projected colonial European phobias as a predicament of immense proportions. Oddly, while laws existed barring European - Aboriginal unions they were rarely enforced provided that the husband was White. Such couplings were deemed acceptable in the xenophobic zeal to rapidly assimilate North American Indigenous populations deemed "salvageable" by Christian missionaries while conversely offering a steady supply of comfort women for pioneers. Colonialism makes for strange bedfellows. So does Eugenics. Waffen SS officers were notorious for maintaining Jewish concubines, as were affluent White landowners in the before Jim Crow and long after in the American South preaching segregation by day while exploring and exploiting "brown comfort" in the evenings.

Arch-racist Dixiecrat and grand hypocrite Strom Thurmond proved in the end no different than other great White men of the South when it came to fulfilling his exotic sexual appetite for African women. Despite his not-so-secret bi-racial daughter's recent affirmations of his deep love and affection for her, Mr. Thurmond's record speaks for itself. Vociferous segregationist politics and ideological support for not only for the infamous Mississippi Sovereignty Commission but the Ku Klux Klan and White Citizen's Councils empirically contradicts Mrs. Washington's public statements. Mr. Thurmond's thoroughly American approach to racism was par for the course. Thurmond was not the first nor the last White supremacist recently exposed as a closet race-mixer. Thomas Jefferson was also posthumously caught with his hand in the cookie jar when forensic DNA proved what Africans in this country knew all along. In his often-quoted "Notes on the State of Virginia", Jefferson implicitly rationalises and defends African slavery to French critics of the slave trade in the Americas nation by particularizing the genetic and psychological differences between the races. The revolting "veil of blackness" Jefferson describes as foul and unbecoming in the Africans he owned must have also served as an powerful aphrodisiac seeing as Sally Hemmings and other slaves bore him several mulatto children. Since Hemmings herself was of mixed racial origin, hence, mulatto, she was considered "acceptable" enough to take with him to France.

Without question, European colonial history clearly proves that non-White women are viewed as legitimate and desirable vessels for White male sexual release. Counter arguments in the presence of such vast evidences are patently indefensible. This is not to say that there aren't earnest attempts in racist revisionism. These arguments are so purposefully misleading and insidious that I choose not to catalog them here. But in the interest of clarification I will specify one glaring instance and move on.

In 1967, the Supreme Court ruled anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional opening the door to legal challenges that stripped said statutes from the books in Virginia and several other states. Cultural revisionists cite this action as America progressively and confidently facing its racial partition by leaving such baggage in the past. Nevertheless, during the circus-like climate surrounding the O.J. Simpson murder trial in L.A. County, discussion abounded on AM talk radio concerning the perils of race-mixing with hosts regularly fielding calls from angered listeners as to whether this proves that anti- miscegenation laws should make a comeback. So much for the purportedly bygone misunderstandings of American customary racist antiquities, the past is still with us.

The argument would seem to be that we, as Americans, have come quite a long way. But how far is far? It is relatively common today in the larger urban areas of the United States to see couples made up of different races/ethnicity mixtures, apparently undisturbed by the firmly held Western social taboos prohibiting such relationships. With the modern political/economic phenomenon of globalization and the usability of the Internet, many formerly very visible social barriers have been seemingly surpassed by acquiescence, signaling the triumph of humanism and unhindered freedom of expression. In the vociferous opinion of the average Western observer and syndicated conservative apologists, racial bigotry has devolved into a misfortunate aberration of a far-flung past.

However, appearances can be extremely deceiving. Especially in matters of race, culture, ethnicity and class stratification in American society. To charter members of the Euro-American power structure, the American social system is the marvel of the last two centuries and the modus operandi of the next. With cultural fairs, multi-ethnic film festivals and in larger cities, ample culinary varieties readily available, how they ask, can one condemn this country as not only racist, but inherently racist? Despite the fact that the commissars of the establishment through populist appeal and selective denial perpetuate the fallacies of racial harmony and justice in the U.S., non-Europeans still anxiously and with good reason anticipate future transgressions.

Indeed, the 21st century has already shown itself to be stagnantly engaged with the difficult subject of race. Asian actress Kelly Hu recently appeared as a guest on the chat show Jimmy Kimmel Live and found herself confronted with ethnic insensitivity on national television. When Kimmel asked Hu what her nationality was, Kelly replied with a laugh, "Um, I'm American!" And then, Jimmy continued with, "No, I mean what's your heritage." Ok, strike one. He then asked her, "So did you know karate since you were a little kid?" Kelly curtly responded with, "Why is it that everyone assumes you know karate if you're Asian?" The audience seemed amused by this demonstrating their approval with laughter and clapping. The same thing happened on the now defunct Rush Limbaugh television program designed to augment his popular syndicated radio program. During a rant against political correctness, Limbaugh posted an illustration of what he termed "Uncle Tomahawk", a cartoon caricature comprised of African and Native American stereotypes. The artists' victim wore a full Plains Indian war bonnet, sported oversize lips and elicited two full minutes of laughter from the audience which was entirely made up of White, professionally attired ditto-heads. So despite the assurances of purported Euro-centric "race experts" such as Dinesh D'souza or the authours of The Bell Curve, race matters. Why it matters is always up for raucous debate but rarely up for committed action to effectively deal with it. Certain areas of the discussion can be brutally honest in it's appraisal, but it is nearly almost always over shadowed by brand name apologist concessions rather than intelligent dissection.

The social phenomena, only now being discussed outside of closed circles is the preponderance of Asian female/European male dating and marriage in the U.S. Racism, charges of colonial brainwashing and Asian female sexual fetishism are touchy subjects independently and even more volatile when grouped in concert. During the mid-eighties the noticible but not at all overwhelming number of interracial relationships between Whites and Africans, particularly relationships between White women and African males were issues of major public discourse. Today the issue has become the preponderance of romantic relationships between Whites and Asians, or more to the point, the particularly overwhelming occurrence of relationships between White men and Asian women. It is oddly peculiar and telling that the trend is unequivocally a one-way road.

The prevalent structure of the new miscegenation is between White men and Asian women, not the other way around. To state empirically that Asian male/White female relationships are not occurring with a greater frequency as well would be disingenuous. Certainly there are a plethora of visible exceptions, but the enormously disproportionate representations of White male/Asian female couplings are clearly supported by matrimony and census statistics. The official government figures differ however from other studies in that recent changes in racial/ethnic self-definition on Federal forms and school records are reflecting the new, although vague concepts of multiculturalism.
Nearly one in three children whose fathers are White and mothers African identified themselves as White, according to an analysis of 1990 census data prepared by Harvard University sociologist Mary C. Waters. That was roughly a 50 percent build up over 1980, when fewer than one in four of the children with African mothers and White fathers were identified as White. Accordingly, half of the children counted of White fathers and American Indian mothers were identified as White, while more than half of the children of White fathers and Japanese or Chinese mothers were listed as White in 1990. The U.S. Census Bureau reports there were over 465,000 Asian Pacific Islander/white interracial couples married in the U.S. by 1990.

Since 1960, the percentage of white husband/API wife couples has increased from 61.6% to 71.3% of API/white couples, while the percentage of API husband/white wife couples decreased from 38.4% to 28.7%. Among several of the independent reports I reviewed for this piece, various statistics place the percentages of White male/American-born Asian female unions in the U.S. as opposed to Asian/Asian at roughly one in three. For foreign-born Asian females, the ratio is generally seen as greater than 50%. Non-married cohabitation estimates show that White males are the partners of choice as Asian women's cohabiting partners. Asian women are much more likely to cohabit with white men than men from any other racial group including their own. Nearly 45 percent of cohabiting Asian women have white partners, while less than 43 percent have Asian partners. At the time of this writing, independent studies report more than 67% of Asian females residing in the U.S., (recent immigrants and American-born Asians alike) choose to restrict their romantic choices towards White European American males exclusively, shunning Asian men as a matter of accepted practice.

Hiromi Ono of the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research (ISR) states her belief that Asian female stereotypes and the myth of White male superiority factor into why so many Asian women commit outside of their ethnic group. "There have been people who say that there is much more of an attraction for men, white men, towards Asian women, because of this sexual image that's been imposed upon them." Her collaborator, David Harris also contends in their joint research paper entitled "Estimating the Extent of Intimate Contact Between the Races" presented in 2000, that stereotypes are primarily responsible for the significantly lower percentage of Asian men dating whites. Their report noted that Asian men were more likely than Asian women to have Asian spouses. 79 percent of Asian men were married to Asian women while 16 percent of Asian men had white spouses. Of non-married cohabiting Asian men, slightly over 37 percent of Asian men have white female partners.

Why is this happening and why in such to an extreme degree and, why now? Asians have maintained a steady presence in North America for more than a hundred years. First as low-wage Chinese labourers and Filipino slaves sold to railroad companies, then hand laundries for cowboys to fast food providers to gold miners to "Two Wongs will make it White!" motifs for Abercrombie and Fitch T-shirts, (remember that one?) And throughout most of that period, Asian communities have lived a very discrete existence cloistered within tight knit traditional communities. Part cultural, part induced by American fears of Yellow menace. With such survivalist cultural discipline in place for so long, what finally encouraged and continues to encourage Asian women to abandon that separateness? And more importantly given the sketchy history between Asians and Anglos from the mysterious and barbaric West, (the classical Eastern perspective) why should such relationships suddenly become not merely commonplace, but now apparently socially mandated? Is this really a recent phenomenon or has it also occurred in the past? Is it feasible to assume that European colonialism and the utilization of racism in that endeavor towards non-Anglo-Saxon populations may weigh in on this trend? And to what degrees can we attribute racism in these choices? What of the children of such unions, what special challenges may they face? And if this is an engineered design, who stands to benefit from such social planning? Let us review the beginning of Europe's colonial spread and the results of their contact with Native cultures where they have extended themselves.

Race-mixing and colonial social engineering

With the colonial expansion of Europe during the last half of the 15th century, military and theological conquest of targeted populations nearly always resulted in some form of involuntary servitude. Along with the paternalistic nature of European based colonialism as opposed to the maternal social custom common to most Indigenous communities, it was assumed that the female members of these slave castes were by default, vessels for the sexual release of the master classes. Slave owners viewed this as a matter of exercising their prerogative to "possess" any female within their slave stables that they took to their fancy. Especially evident in the example of Brazil, very few Portuguese women were present during the early days of colonial occupation. Miscegenation, while rarely spoken of favourably aloud was common between Indigenous women and Portuguese males from the very beginning. Even after sufficient numbers of women from Portugal had immigrated to Brazil, interracial relationships of varying degrees still took place. However there were specific limitations.

European males were discreetly assumed in public and openly in private free to explore their sexuality by crossing the colour line. Paradoxically but not unsurprisingly they socially as well as legally instituted taboos preventing Native males and colonial females from doing the just same as their counterparts. For the females of such clandestine relationships, social condemnation and "untouchable" status were the normal punishments for such transgressions with certain death for the Native male mandated by law and clergy. Under European imperialist bids for domination of natural resources and free labour in far-flung foreign lands, this "slaver's prerogative" became in many cases, official policy used to maintain positive control over populations resistant to colonialist control.

It took a bit of time but eventually the powers that were realized they had gained something tangible in allowing White males their way with the Native female populations. The offspring of these unions were naturally bi-racial and begrudgingly tolerated but became regarded as potentially useful pawns in their colonialist plans. Being raised in homes predominately European in attitude (i.e., dominated by the father's cultural life-ways) while Indigenous in essence (due to some degree of limiting cultural influence from the mother) such children regarded themselves as "White" even if they were not generally treated as such outside of the home. In Brazil and Mexico the focused creation of this 'Assimilado' caste, provided a buffer between the colonial power structure and the Indigenous populations perpetually teetering on the verge of revolution. The assimilado's basic function was to curry the trust of the common people who usually viewed the assimilado as one of their own due to maternal custom as opposed to the paternalism the assimilado child was reared with. Their assistance in quelling revolts and redirecting the masses in areas where the colonialist would be harshly received proved an immense success. This practice was used to great effect in Indochina (Vietnam) by France and Belgium, in the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico and Mexico under Spain and to a initial lesser but ultimately increasing extent by the United States in regards to North American Aboriginal populations. But it's greatest achievements were seen in South America, where this new ethnic class in due course soon led colonial bids for independence from the mother nations. This social repositioning by the assimilados had two basic goals. First, by leading the fight for national independence, they were confident of ensuring their own elevated status within the new social caste system thusly enjoying the fruits of power while deftly avoiding the colonial system of Indigenous slavery.
In Africa, the "In-betweens" informed the colonialists of movements plotted against them and other traitorous actions, but never gained any real or imagined independent status as in the South American example. The best an In-between could hope for was the vague and uncertain social status of "coloured". This racial classification was officially absent everywhere except in the Southern White dominated states of Rhodesia and South Africa were racial classifications were formally defined and codified into law. Certain Natives who were regarded as trustworthy were issued "class cards" by the French and Belgian colonial municipalities and in some cases sent to the colonial home country but these liberties were granted on "merit" rather than racial/ethnic identity.

The reader may be asking his or herself what South American colonialism this has to do with Asian women choosing White men almost exclusively over Asian males. On its surface, interracial dating and marriage can reasonably be viewed as the fulfillment of the American dream in that all are measured by their merit regardless of race. Maybe. Under the surface exists something much more murky. To understand a social occurrence or trend, it is prudent to view what conditions (past and present) have led to the current train of accepted social custom. To ignore the history of Europe's colonial deeds towards the objects of their control is revisionist and wittingly enabling the modern forms of racism (in the true sense of the word) to continue unhindered. Once one investigates which individuals become the most defensive of these pairings, it becomes clear that: (1) there is a definite power play in such relationships and (2) it serves the needs of the racial/social/economic upper classes and (3) it fills a need for the American male who must now contend with White feminism and an imagined loss of social control.

In a 1997 poll of American males by NEWSWEEK news journal, 48% of the White male respondents reported significant feelings of loss (personal, political and economic) and displayed attitudes described by one poll collector as "severe depression." For the average Euro-American male between the ages of 19 to 45, Asian women represent a "purity" and "moral fortitude" not found in European American women. What they really mean is that Asian women, especially those raised traditionally will be more likely to "submit" to pathetic American male notions of masculinity and paternalism and will offer little, if any, resistance to such chauvinism.
Even though this racist Western matriarchal point of view is well known to educated Asian women, many still make the decision to date, marry and bear children to the same people who have historically maligned their particular cultures and nations. Is the self-respect of Asian women so low or collectively non-existent as to allow such willing and complete submission to White male sexual pathologies? As evidence to this indignity take the case of Terry Nichols, co-defendant of Timothy McVeigh of Oklahoma Federal Building fame. There is no doubt that McVeigh and his partner in crime Nichols were White supremacists and active followers of the neo-Nazi themed World Church of the Creator and were in contact with militia groups littered throughout that network. Just divorced at age 35, Nichols went straight to the Philippines and registered with a mail-order bride agency. In Cebu City he assumed he found the ideal Suzie Wong, Marife Torres, a 17-year-old virgin daughter of a traffic officer. He placed his order paid the agencies fees and waited for delivery of his "bride". When his package arrived almost a year later, Torres was six months pregnant with another man's child. While it is reasonable to assume that Nichols was upset with this to say the least, they carried on as a legally married couple for seven years. The winter of Nichols personal discontent with White racist middle-aged male hypocrisy ended with his wife testifying at her husband's Oklahoma bombing trial. Marife testified on the stand that in 1995 she returned to the Philippines and considered considering ending the marriage and returning to school. Her reason? Terry was spending so much time with Timothy McVeigh she grew jealous and felt unappreciated. She made it a condition upon her return that Nichols would not spend so time with his pal McVeigh. Marife also testified that she traveled to gun shows with her anti-government husband and participated in hawking survivalist supplies to militia types. She sold firearms, military-grade foodstuffs, and plastic bottles of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. She obviously was quite well aware of Nichols' racialist pro-White, anti-Government views but stayed with him anyway. Is Marife unique? I don't think so. Here's another little paradox that never quite seems to come up in discussions concerning similar relationships. Terry Nichols is an avowed White supremacist, yet he went so far as to go to a Southeast Asian nation to seek a female companion, an action in direct conflict with his racial purity/separatist views. It seems racism and ethnic bigotry become diluted and permissive at the European groin level even for the separatist World Church of the Creator.

The A.P.A.C. (Association of Personal Advertisers and classifieds) released a March 4th 1999 report titled "The mail-order bride industry and it's impact on U.S. immigration." In this very detailed report on the hideous practice of MOB's (Mail-order brides) they exposed the West's efforts to undermine native Asian social structures by flooding Eastern media with Western films, television and pop-culture in what Newt Gingrich's Washington D.C. think tank euphemistically coined 'Intellectual imperialism'. By weighing the moral authourity of the United States against the "immoral" cultures of Asian societies thereby directly throwing into question the legitimacy of their unique social customs. As the report outlined:

"Why do foreign women want American husbands? Many sources suggest that these women are searching for a "better life" in terms of socio-economic factors--they do, for the most part, come from places in which jobs and educational opportunities for women are scarce and wages are low. However, when the women themselves are asked this question, the answer generally indicates an attraction to American men (they look like movie stars) and an aversion to native men. Americans, they say, make good husbands while Filipino (Thai/Indonesian/Russian/etc.) men do not. Americans are thought to be faithful to their wives, while the native men are cruel and run around with other women. True or not, this is the perception." (March 1999 A.P.A.C. report)

With such uniquely American television pulp such as Baywatch, Friends and Beverly Hills 91210, the impression that foreign viewers receive is a sanitized, White dominant ideal of American life, shown from the view of colonial Euro-American sensibilities. In addition, the prevailing myth of the "Rich, American Joe," (as popularized by C.I.A. sponsored radio programming directed towards populations resistant to American control, such as RADIO MARTI in Cuba and RADIO ASIA) leads many of these women desperate to escape their poverty brought to them courtesy of U.S. led multinationals business interests to "sell" themselves on the worldwide market as "Brides."

This leaves Native men questioning their own self-worth, instigates the disintegration of the native social/ethnic culture, familial ties and expectations and throws wide open the gates of economic and sexual exploitation. The Philippines stands out as an acutely accurate example of such modern imperialism. Immediately following the Spanish-American war, the U.S. decided to "assimilate" the Philippine islands against the will of the population (including Cuba, Puerto Rico and Guam) and ended up fighting the three-year long Philippine-American war resulting in genocide against more than half of the Indigenous population. To further illustrate the indignities heaped upon the Philippine people following their eventual loss to the Americans, the United States made the Philippine campaign the centrepoint of the 1904 World's Fair held that year in St. Louis, MI. In what was enthusiastically termed a "parade of evolutionary progress," visitors could inspect the "primitives" that represented the counterbalance to "Civilisation" justifying Kipling's poem "The White Man's Burden". Pygmies from New Guinea and Africa who were later displayed in the Primate section of the Bronx Zoo were paraded next to American Indians such as Apache warrior Geronimo selling his autograph. But the main draw was the Philippine exhibit complete with full size replicas of Indigenous living quarters erected to exhibit the inherent backwardness of the Philippine people. The purpose was to highlight both the "civilising" influence of American rule and the economic potential of the island chains' natural resources on the heels of the Philippine-America War. It was reportedly the largest specific Aboriginal exhibit displayed in the exposition. As one pleased visitor commented, the human zoo exhibit displayed: "the race narrative of odd peoples who mark time while the world advances, and of savages made, by American methods, into civilized workers".

Back in the Philippines American military forces installed a puppet government in which the first and each successive Philippine President was obliged to swear absolute loyalty to the U.S. and announced the first Western-based Democracy in Southeast Asia. To this day, the U.S. faces strong resistance from many native quarters in the islands due to their reluctance to totally leave the Philippines alone. The U.S. Government and its international business interests rely heavily upon pro-American media propaganda and its resulting psychological dependence for White American acceptance to keep organized opposition to U.S. influence at a minimum. The old Spanish and Portuguese tactic of creating an in-between caste (Hapa's,) the new old tactic of MOB's and a prosperous Assimilado class, insures the necessary internal as well as external support needed to maintain a positive and profitable atmosphere for America's interests, whether they be economic or military.

Philippine women married to White American males especially American military service personnel have proved themselves an asset to American imperialists by blurring these abuses. And the children that result from these unions have increasingly shown that they view themselves as "American" as opposed to Philippino and stridently assert their "model minority" status as bridges between the two nations. Thusly tilting the moral scales against Philippine independence activists they openly decry as anti-American, isolationist and racist. The effects of this assimilation can readily be seen in the organizations that have been created to specifically celebrate the inclusion of Phillipinos in the1904 Philippine exhibition and the special and important "uniqueness" of Philippine-American intermarriages to international commerce. If true love is supposed to be the real basis of these relationships, why go to such lengths to embrace the dehumanizing and reprehensible aspects of the 1904 exhibition, express complete ignorance to the illegality of the Philippine-American War and further, highlight the aid such relationships lend to international businesses? American companies with business concerns in the Philippines actively recruit Hapas to represent their firms in negotiations with Philippine nationals and openly encourage their White male employees to develop "personal relationships" with that nation's women. The assimilado system has obviously not disappeared. 'Visiting Forces Agreement' bullied through the Philippine senate under then President "Erap" Estrada clearly support this claim.

Suzie Wong or Madame Butterfly?

This leads us to question of why so many Asian women are overwhelmingly abandoning cultural traditions and exclusively associating themselves with European American men and culture. For the Asian female, it is seen as a ticket to the good life. A means to rise through racial barriers that would historically have prevented her from doing so on her own. By "whitening" herself, she assimilates easier, thereby securing a social status higher than that of a "traditionally Asian" woman. Her children will be more likely to receive a better education and suffer less social and economic stratification. More than likely, her family will benefit from her "partnering smartly" and use this new status ("our daughter married a rich American") to improve their lot. The Asian male /White female end of the spectrum is still minute but the reasons and results give the impression of being the same. For those Asian men who "land a blonde," they are said to have 'arrived.' For the White male, it appears very simplistic, he obtains an exotic "piece" that will allow him to "be a man", apparently something otherwise denied to him by White women. As evidence of the commonality of this racist attitude, I submit a snippet from a on-line MOB website aptly named "A Chinese Princess." On the index page, the site owner lists his reasons why White males should seek out Asian women:

Women from Asia are charming. They are petite, soft, and gentle. It is such a pleasure to spend time with a woman who is charming and derives pleasure just from talking and listening to what you have to say. Women from Asia are feminine. They are normally Petite and slender with delicate bone structure. They typically have smooth, silky, hairless skin. Women from Asia are gentle. They don't bust your chops, when you are home a little late, or forget an anniversary. They let you know if they are unhappy with your behavior, but it is typically done in warm, friendly way so that arguments and hard feelings are generally avoided. Women from Asia appreciate a gentleman. These women do not scold you, and call you a male chauvinist when you hold open a door for them. They appreciate politeness and thank you for it. Women from Asia appreciate the way western men treat their women. Asian men have a bad track records for the way they treat their women. They expect their women to serve them, to carry the heavy bags, to walk behind, to take orders from him, his son, and his mother. Western men, especially American men have very good reputations. We are world famous for treating women with respect and consideration. These traits are very appealing to any women who receives your letters. Women from Asia value marriage. They do not believe in divorce. They marry for life. They believe in finding the right man and sticking by him, in good times and bad. Women from Asia value family. Family is all important. Husband, children, parents, relatives come first. Husband and children never take second place to her career. Women from Asia value tradition. If you have traditional values and like to do things the way they have been done before, your ways and beliefs are accepted and appreciated, not criticized. Women from Asia value maturity. If you are older than your woman, that's not a problem, it's a plus. Asian women respect maturity. It signifies wisdom, stability, experience and gentleness"

This is not, unfortunately, a minority opinion.

To be fair, opinions among Asian males are as to be expected varied on the subject. However there does exist a certain amount reasonable resentment shared by a majority of Asian males. While not articulated openly, many Asian males consider the European men who exclusively seek out Asian women as typically low on the totem pole for what many Euroamerican women would actively pursue. As one Korean university student explained to me over latte's in Seattle's Capitol Hill area, "These guys are not models." He and his friend were in agreement that White men who cannot "score" well with White women are likely to fare better with Asian women who as they put it, believe the "hype" of the sensitive, intelligent and handsome White man.

And while I try very hard to be un-opinionated in a personal nature when it comes to racial issues, it does appear that these men could generally appeal to Asian women who generalize ALL White American men as "better". Propaganda has historically proven itself a powerful instrument that can go a long way in forming attitudes than Asian males collectively are an inept lot while portraying White males as exactly the opposite. As Professor Hamamoto of UC at Davis has commented: "Like I tell my class...the White man's lust for the Yella woman stems from his imperial presence beginning in the Philippines, to occupied Japan...to Korea...to Vietnam, to Thailand....linked to this imperial presence is the system of military prostitution that has migrated overseas to the U.S. in the form of 'Oriental' massage parlors, dating services, and marriage brokerages. I understand the character 'Ling' played by Lucy Liu in this larger context. For Liu or any other Yella woman to feel flattered that the white man fetishizes her simply as an un-raced, ahistorical, universalized 'human being' is simply deluded."

This "delusion" is not limited to Asian women seeking acceptance from the White power complex. American-born Africans in the Americas still suffer from this 'please love me' complex. As a child growing up in the ghettos of New York, I was under the impression that Black women were born with straight hair, while Black men were born with curly (or nappy) hair. Hair is such a volatile issue within the African community that it is rarely openly addressed, even amongst African people themselves in private. The internalisation of racial bigotry in regards to African self-identity still evokes violent images of "tribalism," "savageness," and any other negativism you can conceive of in regards to African peoples, cultures and life-ways. Africans have grown to regard their natural curly hair as "Ugly," while straight hair implies "Class" and "Beauty." One company even goes to the extent of marketing a lye-based hair straightening relaxer kit titled "African Pride" which paradoxically displays absolutely no pride at all except perhaps in being colonialised. The hair issue is becoming somewhat of a moonchild within the Asian community in America also. Multitudes of Asian women are bleaching their hair and when questioned about it, have become increasingly belligerent in their defenses. Responses not unlike those of African women are offered when challenged as to their styling choices. The parallels are frightening and clear.

African women surgically reduce their lip thickness, lighten their skin tone and remodel their noses. Asian women choose to surgically round off their eyes and undergo breast enhancement. In both cases, the females of these two distinct peoples are attempting to achieve the same goals, trying to arrive at a Caucasian idealization of femininity. As writer Wena Poon has intelligently pointed out, it is appalling that increasingly large numbers of Asian women are ashamed to look Asian. Plastic surgery to simulate the pointed Western nose, or undergoing eyelid incisions that corrects(?) almond shaped eyes are all observable ciphers of Asians rejecting precisely what makes them Asian.

Succeeding this it is assumed, acceptance will come automatically. But at what price? In a nation that claims to embrace diversity, why should such stereotypical notions not only exist, but flourish virtually uncontested? Indeed, these very same racial/sexual complexes appear to be promoted by the very same institutions that installed these prejudices and social castes in the first place towards specific goals. The primary objective is obvious, psychological control of minority populations within the spheres of U.S. influence.

The bigger picture is more troubling than many dare to openly articulate. With major media taking notice of the phenomenon, (Asian girl/White boy films and ads, even involving child models on breakfast cereal boxes) the American consciousness toward the Asian has softened. This makes American involvement in Asia far easier for the American tax payer to accept and when necessary, condone. By bringing the idea of an open Asia to the Westerner, support for the creation of Asian markets and investment by multi-national mega-corporations is seen as "beneficial" and "necessary" to American economic growth and beneficial to the nations involved. Of course these same supporters know or care little for those subject to eventual cultural destruction in order for these new plans to function. While Starbucks and Nike shoes promise to improve the lives of Asian people in the eyes of Eurocentricists, little note is taken to the Indigenous peasant farmers in coffee producing countries eeking out a subsistence living working for foreign landowners, or the sweatshops on American protectorate islands in the South Pacific where high-end shoes and other clothing are constructed under slave conditions in clear violation of the United Nations charter on human rights.
This is why to those who control international commerce, this trend is essential to their vested interests. The emergence of a twentysomething "Hapa" class has already shown its leanings by supporting the ends of the multi-national corporations and the imperialist needs of the west.

Personalities such as actress Lucy Liu and newscaster Connie Chung aggressively assert their "Americaness" while rarely if ever addressing the problematic complexities of being Asian in America or being Asian and female in America. And even, (in my opinion) more insulting to the Asian community is their conscious, concerted effort to align themselves with all things "Western" while enthusiastically rebuffing what is "Eastern."

Who people choose to be with is a personal decision. I must logically concede that it would be foolish to assume that every such union is riding on these nefarious factors. I've personally known a few (really, only a rare few) such relationships that were based on all the normal things, attraction, mutual respect and a healthy dose of lust. However, to ignore or to deny the sociological fact that societal pressure strongly dictates who you may finally choose in the end run is juvenile and inherently perilous. 1930's German Jewry considered themselves thoroughly assimilated and therefore, "German." They were proved very wrong in the end. Asians in the United States should take heed of this historical lesson in assimilation.

Ask Scientist Wen Ho Lee.

Ade is an internationally regarded essayist and Indigenist political commentator. He has been called one of North America's most articulate and uncompromising post-colonialist voices examining the motives, means and end results of 500 years of pro-Eurocentric global exploitation. His highly informative writings and public discussions have been studied in university courses and political action groups in the U.S. and abroad.

Related Links
· More about Dating and Sexuality
· News by Andrew

Most read story about Dating and Sexuality:
Yellow Porn

Article Rating
Average Score: 4.85
Votes: 7

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Very Good


 Printer Friendly Page  Printer Friendly Page

 Send to a Friend  Send to a Friend

"Login" | Login/Create an Account | 4 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

one of the best articles i've read on MM. (Score: 1)
by bsgxnyc on Wednesday, April 21 @ 11:10:06 EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)
Def touched upon many important issues. While some might find this paper one sided i felt it touched on enough views that it can be considered a fair shake on both sides.

Re: The Passions of Suzie Wong Revisited (Score: 1)
by Tuan on Thursday, April 22 @ 01:40:38 EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)
man, i love it when they intellectualize to explain why we have so many sellouts in our ranks. Probably one of the more cohensive essay to explain the phenomen. I have a feeling most people aren't going to read this because of it's length. too bad :(

Web site engine\'s code is Copyright © 2002 by PHP-Nuke. All Rights Reserved. PHP-Nuke is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
Page Generation: 0.677 Seconds